Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. POSyscall or sysenter on 32 bits Linux?
    primarykey
    data
    text
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. COpossible duplicate of [What is better "int 0x80" or "syscall"?](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12806584/what-is-better-int-0x80-or-syscall)
      singulars
    2. COThere is indeed something related, [here](http://stackoverflow.com/a/12806910/279335), but which does not answer the question. He says `syscall` isn't available in 32 bits mode of Intel CPUs, but the assembler compiled it in 32 bits mode; either the assertion is unclear or it is wrong. Then, I get a core‑dump due to an illegal instruction, but this instruction is available on all Intel CPU starting with Pentium II, and mine is far above that. He mention `sysenter`, which I tried with the same result. Anyway, I've never seen any mention of `sysenter` in Linux ABI, only `int 80h` or `syscall`.
      singulars
    3. COWell, according to “[System Calls (wiki.osdev.org)](http://wiki.osdev.org/System_Calls)”, `syscall` is the AMD equivalent of the Intel `sysenter`. It says “*On Intel CPU, starting from the Pentium II, a new instruction pair sysenter/sysexit has appeared. It allows a faster switch from user mode to kernel mode, by limiting the overhead of changing mode. **A similar instruction pair has been created by AMD: Syscall/Sysret**. However the behaviour of these instructions are different from Intel's.*”
      singulars
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload