Use special-case short-form encodings for AL/AX/EAX, and other short forms and single-byte instructions
Examples assume 32 / 64-bit mode, where the default operand size is 32 bits. An operand-size prefix changes the instruction to AX instead of EAX (or the reverse in 16-bit mode).
inc/dec a register (other than 8-bit):
inc eax /
dec ebp. (Not x86-64: the
0x4x opcode bytes were repurposed as REX prefixes, so
inc r/m32 is the only encoding.)
inc bl is 2 bytes, using the
inc r/m8 opcode + ModR/M operand encoding. So use
inc ebx to increment
bl, if it's safe. (e.g. if you don't need the ZF result in cases where the upper bytes might be non-zero).
e/rdi+=4, requires that the register points to readable memory. Sometimes useful even if you don't care about the FLAGS result (like
cmp eax,[rdi] /
rdi+=4). And in 64-bit mode,
scasb can work as a 1-byte
inc rdi, if lodsb or stosb aren't useful.
xchg eax, r32: this is where 0x90 NOP came from:
xchg eax,eax. Example: re-arrange 3 registers with two
xchg instructions in a
idiv loop for GCD in 8 bytes where most of the instructions are single-byte, including an abuse of
loop instead of
cdq: sign-extend EAX into EDX:EAX, i.e. copying the high bit of EAX to all bits of EDX. To create a zero with known non-negative, or to get a 0/-1 to add/sub or mask with. x86 history lesson:
movslq, and also AT&T vs. Intel mnemonics for this and the related
mov eax, [rsi] /
rsi += 4 without clobbering flags. (Assuming DF is clear, which standard calling conventions require on function entry.) Also stosb/d, sometimes scas, and more rarely movs / cmps.
pop reg. e.g. in 64-bit mode,
push rsp /
pop rdi is 2 bytes, but
mov rdi, rsp needs a REX prefix and is 3 bytes.
xlatb exists, but is rarely useful. A large lookup table is something to avoid. I've also never found a use for AAA / DAA or other packed-BCD or 2-ASCII-digit instructions, except for a hacky use of DAS as part of converting a 4-bit integer to an ASCII hex digit, thanks to Peter Ferrie.
sahf are rarely useful. You could
and ah, 1 as an alternative to
setc ah, but it's typically not useful.
And for CF specifically, there's
sbb eax,eax to get a 0/-1, or even un-documented but universally supported 1-byte
salc (set AL from Carry) which effectively does
sbb al,al without affecting flags. (Removed in x86-64). I used SALC in User Appreciation Challenge #1: Dennis ♦.
stc (flip ("complement"), clear, or set CF) are rarely useful, although I did find a use for
cmc in extended-precision addition with base 10^9 chunks. To unconditionally set/clear CF, usually arrange for that to happen as part of another instruction, e.g.
xor eax,eax clears CF as well as EAX. There are no equivalent instructions for other condition flags, just DF (string direction) and IF (interrupts). The carry flag is special for a lot of instructions; shifts set it,
adc al, 0 can add it to AL in 2 byte, and I mentioned earlier the undocumented SALC.
cld rarely seem worth it. Especially in 32-bit code, it's better to just use
dec on a pointer and a
mov or memory source operand to an ALU instruction instead of setting DF so
stosb go downward instead of up. Usually if you need downward at all, you still have another pointer going up, so you'd need more than one
cld in the whole function to use
stos for both. Instead, just use the string instructions for the upward direction. (The standard calling conventions guarantee DF=0 on function entry, so you can assume that for free without using
8086 history: why these encodings exist
In original 8086, AX was very special: instructions like
div and others use it implicitly. That's still
the case of course; current x86 hasn't dropped any of 8086's opcodes (at least not any of the officially documented ones). But later CPUs added new instructions that gave better / more efficient ways to do things without copying or swapping them to AX first. (Or to EAX in 32-bit mode.)
e.g. 8086 lacked later additions like
movzx to load or move + sign-extend, or 2 and 3-operand
imul cx, bx, 1234 that don't produce a high-half result and don't have any implicit operands.
Also, 8086's main bottleneck was instruction-fetch, so optimizing for code-size was important for performance back then. 8086's ISA designer (Stephen Morse) spent a lot of opcode coding space on special cases for AX / AL, including special (E)AX/AL-destination opcodes for all the basic immediate-src ALU- instructions, just opcode + immediate with no ModR/M byte. 2-byte
add/sub/and/or/xor/cmp/test/... AL,imm8 or
AX,imm16 or (in 32-bit mode)
But there's no special case for
EAX,imm8, so the regular ModR/M encoding of
add eax,4 is shorter.
The assumption is that if you're going to work on some data, you'll want it in AX / AL, so swapping a register with AX was something you might want to do, maybe even more often than copying a register to AX with
Everything about 8086 instruction encoding supports this paradigm, from instructions like
lodsb/w to all the special-case encodings for immediates with EAX to its implicit use even for multiply/divide.
Don't get carried away; it's not automatically a win to swap everything to EAX, especially if you need to use immediates with 32-bit registers instead of 8-bit. Or if you need to interleave operations on multiple variables in registers at once. Or if you're using instructions with 2 registers, not immediates at all.
But always keep in mind: am I doing anything that would be shorter in EAX/AL? Can I rearrange so I have this in AL, or am I currently taking better advantage of AL with what I'm already using it for.
Mix 8-bit and 32-bit operations freely to take advantage whenever it's safe to do so (you don't need carry-out into the full register or whatever).