Home Original page

[PATCH 3/6] x86: improve operand reversal

Jan Beulich JBeulich@suse.com
Tue Aug 7 14:59:00 GMT 2018 
>>> On 07.08.18 at 16:49, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 7:18 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 07.08.18 at 15:40, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:13 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 07.08.18 at 14:06, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:37 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 06.08.18 at 18:25, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 8:59 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 06.08.18 at 17:09, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> But there is no indication at all in your patch to show that it does
>>>>>>>>> anything remotely to {load} nor {store}.   All your testcase changes
>>>>>>>>> are for the ".s" suffix.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's a whole lot of stuff getting added to *pseudos.s.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That will make sure that {load} and {store} are handler properly
>>>>>>> by actually testing them, instead of relying on the deprecated
>>>>>>> ".s" suffix.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm afraid I'm now confused by the "will" in your response: This
>>>>>> makes it sound as if you assume something is yet to be added. But
>>>>>> all those tests are already there. Bottom line - I'm still hanging in
>>>>>> the air as to which way to proceed (see the earlier enumerated
>>>>>> three options).
>>>>>
>>>>> Your change is't needed unless you can show that it improves {load}
>>>>> or {store}.
>>>>
>>>> H.J., please. What is the purpose of me adding a whole lot of stuff
>>>> to *pseudos.s? Try assembling this without this patch in place. Then
>>>
>>> 1. Verify that your change has expected impact on {load} and {store}.
>>
>> That's what the test case additions (*pseudos.s) are for.
> 
> The ".s" suffix tests != {load} and {store} tests.

Well, of course so far the patch adds both, which I did because
you basically always ask for test cases, and because I wasn't really
aware of the deprecation of .s.

>>> 2. Make sure that their behavior is unchanged in the future.
>>
>> Again - that's what the test case additions (*pseudos.s) are for.
>>
>>> It is perfectly OK for the ".s" suffix to fail since it has been deprecated.
>>
>> But it is then also (imo) perfectly okay if some previously broken
>> .s uses now suddenly work. And by extension it could then also
>> be okay to actually test that those now working cases work
>> sensibly (and will continue to work in the future).
>>
>> In the end I _still_ don't know what you want me to do.
> 
> I don't want any new ".s" suffix tests.

I'll get rid of them then.

Jan
More information about the Binutils mailing list