Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Rod Pemberton Newsgroups: alt.os.assembly,alt.lang.asm,alt.os.development Subject: Re: Protected mode on 64-bit CPU Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 23:17:14 -0400 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 17 Message-ID: <20160903231714.401eef2c@_> References: <563a8630-6a56-4480-9b76-d519ca60acbe@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: n4wpt9zq8xR26Ttf9mo2BA.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.13.1 (GTK+ 2.24.13; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Xref: csiph.com alt.os.assembly:18 alt.lang.asm:6698 alt.os.development:10083 On Sat, 3 Sep 2016 19:10:19 -0700 (PDT) muskrat7@gmail.com wrote: > Does anyone know why 64-bit long mode does not have built-in hardware > protection? I know many didn't use the 32-bit hardware segmentation > but it was a nice option to have if you wanted... Did they just get > rid of it in 64-bit mode due to the perception it wouldn't be used or > were there other limitations that prevented this feature? > I'm cross-posting this to alt.os.development and alt.lang.asm. You might also try posts to comp.lang.asm.x86 and comp.arch. Rod Pemberton