OSDev.org

Posted: **Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:05 pm**

I have a doubly nested loop that I use to search the FAT root directory for a filename in a bootloader. The code follows:

Code: Select all

.ff_search_loop:
        mov     si,     dx              ;; beginning of string
        mov     di,     bx              ;; entry to search
        push    cx                      ;; save loop counter
        mov     cx,     11              ;; length of filename
.ff_strcmp_loop:
        cmpsb                           ;; compare bytes
        jne     .ff_next                ;; if unequal, try next entry
        loop    .ff_strcmp_loop
        jmp     ff_search_done          ;; if loop finishes, then it matches
.ff_next:
        add     bx,     32              ;; try next entry (32-byte entries)
        pop     cx                      ;; restore original loop counter
        loop    .ff_search_loop         ;; if loop finishes, then not found -- this is the problem

ff_not_found:
        mov     word [ebp - 4], 0xffff  ;; return val: not found
        jmp     ff_done

ff_search_done:
        mov     word [ebp - 4], bx      ;; save entry offset

ff_done:

For some reason, the second loop instruction zeros cx, and hence does not loop, and falls through to the not_found code. Bochs register dump immediately before the instruction:

Code: Select all

eax: 0x00000280 640
ecx: 0x00000200 512
edx: 0x00008f1b 36635
ebx: 0x00009ea0 40608
esp: 0x00009be5 39909
ebp: 0x00009bf9 39929
esi: 0x00008f1c 36636
edi: 0x00009e81 40577
eip: 0x00008d98
eflags 0x00000286
id vip vif ac vm rf nt IOPL=0 of df IF tf SF zf af PF cf

Immediately after:

Code: Select all

eax: 0x00000280 640
ecx: 0x00000000 0
edx: 0x00008f1b 36635
ebx: 0x0000de80 56960
esp: 0x00009be5 39909
ebp: 0x00009bf9 39929
esi: 0x00008f1c 36636
edi: 0x0000de61 56929
eip: 0x00008d9a
eflags 0x00000282
id vip vif ac vm rf nt IOPL=0 of df IF tf SF zf af pf cf

The instruction also messes with the values of bx and di, which are the variables that are changed within the outer loop. Does anyone know why this is happening?

Edit:
Note that it also clears the parity flag; is that relevant?

Posted: **Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:31 pm**

loop decrements cx and jumps if not zero (IIRC) cmpsb compares ds:si to es:di and increments both (once again, IIRC).

I've found this site very useful for ASM programming.

Posted: **Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:32 pm**

How do you know it's not looping? It sounds like it is looping just fine and simply not finding the specified filename.

Posted: **Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:33 pm**

Why not just do a repe cmpsb instead of looping around a cmpsb? Something like this should work:

Code: Select all

...
.ff_strcmp_loop:
mov cx, 11
repe cmpsb
jz ff_search_done
...

Posted: **Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:35 pm**

OK, there it is. When I type 'n' in bochs, it apparently skips over the entirety of a loop, as it does a function. Seems a dumb behavior. Thanks for the help. Also, I am currently using a double loop because it's simpler; I may switch to a repe at some point, but not now.

Posted: **Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:41 pm**

alethiophile wrote:because it's simpler

Ummm, no, it's really not. One line versus five or six. One line needs no labels, five or more needs multiple. Also takes up an extra 5-10 bytes that could be used for a better bootloader.

Posted: **Thu Jun 04, 2009 8:50 pm**

OK, because when I first wrote this code, I didn't really understand rep, and since I haven't gotten around to changing it. I'll probably do that now.

Posted: **Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:24 pm**

What strange values of esp and ebp you have. Align stack pointer to 2 or 4 bytes. Why are you using ebp register, but not bp?

Posted: **Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:52 am**

Also, you are NOT restoring CX to it's original value, and are trashing your stack. Look at your code path if you do a jump to ff_search_done, you never POP CX back to its original value, which means you've left 2-bytes on the stack, that will end up being popped into another variable unkowingly (leaving a nice bug to track down). Using REP will help fix this problem, but you need to be careful with push/pop. These problems tend to show up later on, after you're done testing it by itself and implement it into your other code.

OSDev.org

loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

Re: loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

Re: loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

Re: loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

Re: loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

Re: loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

Re: loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

Re: loop instruction zeros cx for some reason

Re: loop instruction zeros cx for some reason