Hope this is the right place for this post...
There were a lot of problems with my old PC so i decided to build a new one using Athlon64-CPU. I also installed WindowsXP x64 OS and this is working properly.
A look at the white-papers of AMD told me, that the architecture of the Athlon64-CPU is very interesting. The registers are not only expanded towards 64 bit, they added 8 (!) new registers in both CPU and FPU. These registers can only be used if the CPU is switched to 64bit-mode, so we need a 64bit OS.
I know that i am an absolute beginner, but i'm interested how to do assembly in 64bit-mode. So, can anyone tell me if there is something aviable to test it? Neither the search in google nor the search on AMD or Microsoft were successful.
Regards, Phoenix
It's not easy to install and configure, but Visual Studio 2005 beta 1 supports 64-bit programming. I use it to port my JPEG decoder to 64-bit. I repost the link to order it on DVD. It's really a great IDE.
http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/vs2005/get/order/default.aspx
Refresh Tools :
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=afd04ff1-9d16-439a-9a5e-e13eb0341923&displaylang=en
Quote from: manhattan on January 01, 2005, 07:28:26 PM
I repost the link to order it on DVD. It's really a great IDE.
manhattan,
thank you for your help, I've ordered the DVD and give it a try... but is there something aviable like masm32 for 64-bit (may be masm64? :lol)
Do a search on Intel's site. They have a 64-bit assembler BUT it's written in C and must be compiled AND, iirc, it only runs on linux.
From MSDN:
Working with Assembly Code
Assembly code is straightforward to port to AMD64 and 64-bit Windows—and is worth the effort for performance reasons. For example, you can take advantage of the new 64-bit general-purpose registers (r8-r15), and new floating point and 128-bit SSE/SSE2/floating point registers (xmm8-xmm15). However, there are new 64-bit stack frames and calling conventions you should learn about in the ABI (application binary interface) specifications.
The AMD64 Software Conventions document (also known as the AMD64 ABI Specification) is in the beta version of the Microsoft Windows Server™ 2003 Service Pack 1 DDK. You should download and install the Windows DDK and the Microsoft Platform SDK for AMD64 to have access to those ABIs and the documentation.
NOTE: In-line assembly code is not supported with the Microsoft C/C++ compiler and libraries so you have to put the assembly code into a separate MASM file. Compiler intrinsic functions are an alternative to assembly code, and are provided to implement most SSE and SSE2 instructions, in a manner that compiles seamlessly for both 32-bit and 64-bit targets.
Quote from: drhowarddrfine on January 01, 2005, 10:37:52 PM
NOTE: In-line assembly code is not supported with the Microsoft C/C++ compiler and libraries so you have to put the assembly code into a separate MASM file.
Does this mean that 64bit assembly is supported by masm??
Well I gonna make a emu64.inc files for starters, but it means I am interested in how I detect my code is running on a 64bit, or I have to emulate, my extra regs with local memory variables named XMM8-XMM15 and MMX8-MMX15 and st8-st15 if casecode fails???
Just from memory there are versions of NASM and YASM that will build 64 bit AMD x86 code.
Yep: YASM (http://www.tortall.net/projects/yasm/)
and: AMD 64 bit support (http://www.tortall.net/projects/yasm/wiki/AMD64)
This is similar to a question I wanted to discuss as well.
If I remember what I read, AMD and Intel are headed in different directions with the 64 bit movement. Their 64 bit instruction sets are not compatible with each other. AMD is expanding on the x86 instruction set and Intel has developed a new one they call IA64.
Where are we headed as ASM programmers in the 64 bit future? Won't we need to make two different versions of our applications, one for each processor? Will there ever be an MASM64?
Intel has developed Intel Extended Memory 64 Technology (EM64T) for the IA-32 processors, available now:
http://developer.intel.com/products/desktop/processors/pentium4/index.htm
I could find no reference to x86-64, but I was under impression that EM64T is at least mostly compatible with x86-64. You can find more information and links to the Software Developer Guides here:
http://developer.intel.com/technology/64bitextensions/
Quote from: John on January 03, 2005, 03:45:37 PM
If I remember what I read, AMD and Intel are headed in different directions with the 64 bit movement. Their 64 bit instruction sets are not compatible with each other. AMD is expanding on the x86 instruction set and Intel has developed a new one they call IA64.
From: http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/windowsxp_x64_preview.asp
QuoteOn April 9, 2003, Microsoft officially announced that it would support AMD's then-upcoming 64-bit Opteron and Athlon 64 microprocessors with 64-bit native versions of Windows XP and Windows Server 2003. The news must have sent shivers down the spines of executives at Microsoft partner Intel, whose 64-bit Itanium product line has languished because of slow performance and incompatibilities with today's existing 32-bit software. For AMD, of course, it was--and still is--a major victory. Not only was the one time microprocessor also-suddenly getting equal press from Microsoft as Intel, within a year, Intel shocked the world by announcing that it would essentially ape AMD's designs and create 64-bit versions of the Xeon and Pentium 4 CPUs that would be code compatible. The follower had suddenly become the leader.
The Intel IA64-architecture seems to be dead - so i think we have to learn about Athlon64 instruction set? :eek
Quote from: Phoenix on January 03, 2005, 08:23:15 PMThe Intel IA64-architecture seems to be dead - so i think we have to learn about Athlon64 instruction set? :eek
The IA-64 processors compete in a completely different arena than the x86-64/EM64T processors. IA-64 is no where close to dead, and I would not be surprised to see it eventually dominate its target market, considering the *immense* resources of Intel and their *proven* capability.
QuoteIA-64 is no where close to dead, and I would not be surprised to see it eventually dominate its target market
MichaelW - you are of course right - i should have said "seems to be dead for the 'mass market' (?) and was never designed for it."
If Microsoft really releases WinXP x64 in the first half of this year, I think there will be a big interest for 64bit-software based on Athlon64 or EM64T, though 32bit applications should work on this OS as well. A lot of drivers are currently avaiable for XP x64 (most of them as beta-releases), and applications will follow. And that's why I'm interested to learn about 64-bit programming.
( :red that was difficult - had to look up my dictionary a lot of times....)
There is an introduction to x86-64 assembly on this page: http://www.x86-64.org/documentation
Even though it's in gas syntax you should understand it, it isn't so hard to understand..
QuoteThis document is meant to summarise differences between x86-64 and i386 assembly assuming that you already know well the i386 gas syntax. I will try to keep this document up to date until official documentation is available.
agner fogs cpuid testprogram reports modelspecific register on mine and it it doesnt protest when running SSE2, which confuses me
undocumented that xtra regs are also on newer athlon XP's?
so how do I do casecode for check my code is running on amd64?
I believe the information you need is in the AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual, Volume 1: Application Programming and Volume 2: System Programming, available here (http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/DevelopWithAMD/0,,30_2252_739_7044,00.html). And you can get CPUID-related utilities and code samples here (http://www.amd.com.hk/us-en/processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_6291_871%5E2364,00.html).
Hmm, documentation on this whole matter seems to be pretty scarce. Perhaps the big CPU companies are trying to push people more toward HLLs?
Is Microsoft likely to update MASM? When was the last time there was a major update to MASM itself? Looks like we're in for a big CPU architecture war. Are there versions of Windows for both Intel's and AMD's hardware now?
I think there will not be different softwares for Intel- or AMD-based systems as long we are talking about Athlon64 or Intel EM64T. They seem to be compatible, and WindowsXP x64 is designed to work with both processors.
Visual Studio 2005 beta 1 supports 64-bit programming. There are two versions of ml64 included, one of them works in 32-bit-OS, the other one only in 64-bit-OS. Both of them have the same name and version number, the only difference one can see is the filesize. I was able to create an 64bit-obj-file, but i did not get link.exe to work... There also seem to be major changes on Microsoft's Macro Assembler for x64 systems. ML64.exe is still beta, I've tried V8.0.40607.16 (beta 1.04607-1600), with Microsoft® Incremental Linker (beta1.040607-1600) using mspdb80.dll.
Some information about ml64 and Win64 assembler programs:
http://www.codegurus.be/codegurus/Programming/assembler&win64_en.htm (http://www.codegurus.be/codegurus/Programming/assembler&win64_en.htm)
http://www.codegurus.be/codegurus/Programming/riprelativeaddressing_en.htm
So basically, so far, the differences are that parameters are passed in registers and [?]direct adressing isn't supported[/?]
Is the invoke macro part of ML.exe or just the MAM32 package? If it's not directly supported by MASM, a new version of that macro might be difficult to create with registers being used the way they are.
Quotethe differences are that parameters are passed in registers and direct adressing isn't supported?
As the documentation is very small for ml64 within VS 2005 beta - and i am not able to link - it is not possible for me to try it.
From Microsoft Macro Assembler Reference (VS 2005 beta):
QuoteINVOKE
Calls the procedure at the address given by expression, passing the arguments on the stack or in registers according to the standard calling conventions of the language type.
INVOKE expression [[,arguments]]
Remarks
Each argument passed to the procedure may be an expression, a register pair, or an address expression (an expression preceded by ADDR).
ml64 is still beta release and there is still no
complete reference at this point (as far as i know).
What errors do you have when you link ? I had errors too because the linker was using 32-bit libraries. Did you add the path to the 64-bit libraries in the list of directories used by the linker ? The order is important. The 64-bit directories must be the first in the list.
I don't know if it will change in the final release but ml64 beta doesn't support ASSUME, PROC, INVOKE or conditionnal statements (.IF, .WHILE, ...)
Quote from: manhattan on January 09, 2005, 07:59:02 PM
What errors do you have when you link ? I had errors too because the linker was using 32-bit libraries. Did you add the path to the 64-bit libraries in the list of directories used by the linker ? The order is important. The 64-bit directories must be the first in the list.
manhattan, this is what i tried:
First, i copied the required(?) files to one directory:
Quote09.01.2005 22:31 <DIR> .
09.01.2005 22:31 <DIR> ..
09.01.2005 14:48 416 hello64.asm
08.01.2005 20:18 594 hello64.obj
23.03.2004 13:24 182.694 Kernel32.Lib
24.06.2004 22:55 767.488 link.exe
10.06.2004 16:54 268 link.exe.config
08.01.2005 20:16 22 make.bat
08.01.2005 14:40 89 makeit.bat
08.01.2005 20:17 95 makeit1.bat
24.06.2004 22:35 556.544 ml64.exe
24.06.2004 22:55 245.760 mspdb80.dll
25.06.2004 06:26 773.120 msvcr80.dll
23.03.2004 13:25 132.280 User32.Lib
When executing makit.bat, the result is:
QuoteC:\64>ml64 hello64.asm /link /subsystem:windows /defaultlib:kernel32.lib /defaultlib:user32.lib
Microsoft (R) Macro Assembler (x64) Version 8.00.40607.16
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Assembling: hello64.asm
MASM : fatal error A1020: cannot find LINK.EXE
Or just calling link.exe returns...
QuoteC:\64>link
The system cannot execute the specified program.
Seems that this way does not work although all files are in one directory? Hm, perhaps the problem is that i did install VS from W2K, but i try it from XP 64 where no VS is installed? (same machine, dual-boot)
Quote from: manhattan on January 09, 2005, 07:59:02 PM
I don't know if it will change in the final release but ml64 beta doesn't support ASSUME, PROC, INVOKE or conditionnal statements (.IF, .WHILE, ...)
This are bad news... ::)
Quote from: John on January 03, 2005, 03:45:37 PM
This is similar to a question I wanted to discuss as well.
If I remember what I read, AMD and Intel are headed in different directions with the 64 bit movement. Their 64 bit instruction sets are not compatible with each other. AMD is expanding on the x86 instruction set and Intel has developed a new one they call IA64.
Where are we headed as ASM programmers in the 64 bit future? Won't we need to make two different versions of our applications, one for each processor? Will there ever be an MASM64?
Yap, I've noticed it too, AMD manual says that there are rax, rbx,rcx,rdx
and Intell has r0-r127... I'm really confused :( :(
Does it mean that everybody will ship their programmes for 64 in two version (AMD64 and IA64)?
I think you can safely say that the Itanium is a dead duck so IA64 is on its way out. It appears that Intel will follow AMD with x86 64 bit hardware sooner or later and if I understand the licencing between the two of them over the x86 instruction set, the Intel version will be similar to the AMD in terms of instructions.
Wow. After all these years, Intel may finally fall from it's position as the foremost CPU builder.
I like EliCZ description of x86-amd64-ia64 and C at his board :
Quote
If you speak Dutch(x86 asm) then it easier to learn German(amd64 asm) than Russian(ia64 asm). But the best is to know English(C).
=))))
Quote from: drhowarddrfine on January 01, 2005, 10:18:52 PM
Do a search on Intel's site. They have a 64-bit assembler BUT it's written in C and must be compiled AND, iirc, it only runs on linux.
AFAIK Intel provides only IAS, "IA-64 Assembler":
QuoteIAS is a cross-platform assembler; it runs on 32-bit host machines and produces IA-64
object files. IAS does not assemble IA-32 assembly language programs.
I downloaded the full package (manuals and the source code) from one site which is now denied, I don't know why...
News:
IAS means Itanium ASsembler.
I just found that IAS 6.0 is a part of Visual Studio 2005 beta:
for IA-32 platform:
...\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\bin\x86_ia64\ias.exe
for Itanium platform:
...\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\bin\ia64\ias.exe
> 23.03.2004 13:24 182.694 Kernel32.Lib
> 24.06.2004 22:55 767.488 link.exe
> 10.06.2004 16:54 268 link.exe.config
> 24.06.2004 22:35 556.544 ml64.exe
> 24.06.2004 22:55 245.760 mspdb80.dll
> 25.06.2004 06:26 773.120 msvcr80.dll
> 23.03.2004 13:25 132.280 User32.Lib
>
> [...] i did install VS from W2K [...]
I just installed the VS 2005 Beta on a W2K machine, and I can't
seem to find the above files. Do you happen to know which sub
directory they came from? Or did you install from a XP64 system?
Odd.
Kernel32.Lib and User32.lib are in Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\PlatformSDK\Lib\AMD64
All other files are in Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\bin\amd64. They will work on xp64 only. The cross assembler is in Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\bin\x86_amd64
Quote from: nasm64developer on February 18, 2005, 06:24:19 PM
> 23.03.2004 13:24 182.694 Kernel32.Lib
> 24.06.2004 22:55 767.488 link.exe
> 10.06.2004 16:54 268 link.exe.config
> 24.06.2004 22:35 556.544 ml64.exe
> 24.06.2004 22:55 245.760 mspdb80.dll
> 25.06.2004 06:26 773.120 msvcr80.dll
> 23.03.2004 13:25 132.280 User32.Lib
>
> [...] i did install VS from W2K [...]
I just installed the VS 2005 Beta on a W2K machine, and I can't
seem to find the above files. Do you happen to know which sub
directory they came from? Or did you install from a XP64 system?
Odd.
IIRC the files for x86-64 platform are not installed at default. You probably forgot to choose them at the beginning of the instalation. Try reinstall of the VS.
Hope this helps.
> Kernel32.Lib and User32.lib are in Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\PlatformSDK\Lib\AMD64
> All other files are in Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\bin\amd64. They will work on xp64 only. The cross assembler is in Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\bin\x86_amd64
My installation didn't end up with amd64 or x86_amd64 directories.
> IIRC the files for x86-64 platform are not installed at default. You probably forgot to choose them at the beginning of the instalation. Try reinstall of the VS.
The only choice at the beginning was "GUI yes/no". I selected yes (because I know from having tried that selecting no results in a few missing files).
I guess I have to re-try on a x64 box. Sigh.
Quote from: nasm64developer on February 19, 2005, 03:40:32 AM
The only choice at the beginning was "GUI yes/no". I selected yes (because I know from having tried that selecting no results in a few missing files).
I guess I have to re-try on a x64 box. Sigh.
BTW, I use 32-bit WinXP on 32-bit machine.
I've tried "add or remove features" and this is how looks the first window:
http://www.webpark.cz/mazegen/vs2005optionspage.gif
(you have to copy&paste the link in new window/panel otherwise it will not work - probably some security feature)
Make sure you have selected the X64 Compilers and Tools.
> I have a link for those files on the internet. Hang on and let me dig them up.
>
> http://www.sandpile.org/post/msgs/20004525.htm
No longer valid.
But yeah, I got a copy of that file.
It's 8.00.2207, not 8.00.40607.16.
I want 8.00.40607.16...
> I've tried "add or remove features" and this is how looks the first window:
> http://www.webpark.cz/mazegen/vs2005optionspage.gif
> (you have to copy&paste the link in new window/panel otherwise it will not work - probably some security feature)
> Make sure you have selected the X64 Compilers and Tools.
Thanks for tip. I'll try that later this week.
The add/remove -- from within the VC GUI, or do I need
to go via Start / Settings / Control Panel / Add/Remove
Programs? Ah well, I guess I'll figure it out.
Quote from: nasm64developer on February 23, 2005, 02:30:00 AM
The add/remove -- from within the VC GUI, or do I need
to go via Start / Settings / Control Panel / Add/Remove
Programs? Ah well, I guess I'll figure it out.
Sorry, I meant "Change or Remove Visual Studio Beta" option after running the instalation CD:
http://www.webpark.cz/mazegen/vsbetasetup.gif
By clicking this option, you get the already refered Options Page.
> Sorry, I meant "Change or Remove Visual Studio Beta" option after running the instalation CD:
> http://www.webpark.cz/mazegen/vsbetasetup.gif
> By clicking this option, you get the already refered Options Page.
Argh.
I installed via the web (a ~200M download) -- I don't
have the CD.
Yuck.
MSFT sure knows how to make it hard... :-(
You can easily get it on DVD, only at charge of shipping.
http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/vs2005/get/emeaorder/default.aspx