[RFC/RFA] Proper mnemonics for VIA PadLock (i386) instructions
H. J. Lu
hjl@lucon.org
Wed Apr 13 19:29:00 GMT 2005
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Wed Apr 13 19:29:00 GMT 2005
- Previous message (by thread): [RFC/RFA] Proper mnemonics for VIA PadLock (i386) instructions
- Next message (by thread): [RFC/RFA] Proper mnemonics for VIA PadLock (i386) instructions
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 08:55:09PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:07:55 +0930 > From: Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au> > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:43:10PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Because there is already code out there that uses the hyphen. The > > reason for preferring the hyphenated names over the unhyphenated names > > is that the former are used by the VIA documentation. > > I don't like the idea of putting '-' in mnemonic_chars. I think it has > a high likelihood of breaking other valid assembly. The gas app.c code > has a nasty habit of completely removing whitespace once past the > mnemonic of an instruction, and it can get confused. Something like > > addr16 mov -2,%eax > > might fail if '-' is a valid mnemonic char. > > Well, it doesn't fail. The patch to tc-i386.c to allow '-' as a > mnemonic char has been in the OpenBSD tree for more than a year now. > That means all major Open Source software has been compiled with it. > So I'd expect any problems with it would have surfaced by now. > I have the same concern as Alan. Unless ALL x86 assembly codes, open source or otherwise, not just those on OpenBSD, have been assembled correctly with the modified assembler, I don't think it should go into the FSF assembler. H.J.
- Previous message (by thread): [RFC/RFA] Proper mnemonics for VIA PadLock (i386) instructions
- Next message (by thread): [RFC/RFA] Proper mnemonics for VIA PadLock (i386) instructions
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list