[PATCH 3/6] x86: improve operand reversal
H.J. Lu
hjl.tools@gmail.com
Fri Aug 3 16:14:00 GMT 2018
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Fri Aug 3 16:14:00 GMT 2018
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH 3/6] x86: improve operand reversal
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH 3/6] x86: improve operand reversal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: >>>> On 03.08.18 at 17:56, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 8:50 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 03.08.18 at 17:30, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 12:08 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 02.08.18 at 18:43, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Please don't make any changes to the deprecated ".s". >>>>> >>>>> Excuse me, but how many more times should I state that I don't >>>>> make any changes to its behavior? I solely make {store} no longer >>>>> match .s in behavior. In fact I've specifically undone the change >>>>> to .s, in anticipation of your objection to any adjustment to it. >>>> >>>> Why do you change testcases of the .s suffix? >>> >>> s/change/add to/ >>> >>> Deprecated or no, I think the .s suffix should still work, including >>> not causing assembly to fail when used. Try assembling the >>> additions without the source adjustments, and I think you'll find >>> some will fail. To me such adjustments are not "changes to its >> >> Which one? > > The additions to *opts.s. For example, this > > mov 0x12345678, %eax > mov.s 0x12345678, %eax > mov %eax, 0x12345678 > mov.s %eax, 0x12345678 > mov 0x123456789abcdef0, %eax > mov.s 0x123456789abcdef0, %eax > mov %eax, 0x123456789abcdef0 > mov.s %eax, 0x123456789abcdef0 > movabs 0x123456789abcdef0, %eax > movabs.s 0x123456789abcdef0, %eax > movabs %eax, 0x123456789abcdef0 > movabs.s %eax, 0x123456789abcdef0 > mov %eax, (%rdi) > mov.s %eax, (%rdi) > mov (%rdi), %eax > mov.s (%rdi), %eax > mov %cr0, %rax > mov.s %cr0, %rax > mov %rax, %cr7 > mov.s %rax, %cr7 > mov %dr0, %rax > mov.s %dr0, %rax > mov %rax, %dr7 > mov.s %rax, %dr7 > > doesn't assemble with 2.31.1 (several "unsupported instruction" > and one "operand size mismatch"). I saw s.s:4: Error: unsupported instruction `mov' s.s:6: Error: unsupported instruction `mov' s.s:10: Error: operand size mismatch for `movabs' s.s:14: Error: unsupported instruction `mov' s.s:18: Error: unsupported instruction `mov' s.s:22: Error: unsupported instruction `mov' There is no need to fix these since the ".s" suffix has been deprecated. -- H.J.
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH 3/6] x86: improve operand reversal
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH 3/6] x86: improve operand reversal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list