Jan Beulich jbeulich@suse.com
Tue Sep 13 14:24:32 GMT 2022

• Previous message (by thread): Ping: [PATCH v2 1/7] x86/Intel: restrict suffix derivation
• Next message (by thread): [PATCH 0/2] LoongArch: Fix two bugs breaking IFUNC in static PIE
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

On 26.08.2022 12:30, Jan Beulich via Binutils wrote:
> At the example of
> 
> 	extractps $0, %xmm0, %xmm0
> 	insertps $0, %xmm0, %eax
> 
> (both having respectively the same mistake of using the wrong kind of
> destination register) it is easy to see that current behavior is far
> from ideal: The former results in "unsupported instruction" for 32-bit
> code simply because the 2nd template we have is a Cpu64 one. Instead we
> should aim at emitting the "best" possible error, which will typically
> be the one where we passed the largest number of checks. Generalize the
> original "specific_error" approach by making it apply to the entire
> matching loop, utilizing that line numbers increase as we pass further
> checks.
> ---
> v2: Style correction.

Like for patch 1 - since you did comment on v1, may I ask for explicit
feedback? Otherwise again: If I don't hear back by the end of next week,
I guess I'll commit this change.

Jan

---

• Previous message (by thread): Ping: [PATCH v2 1/7] x86/Intel: restrict suffix derivation
• Next message (by thread): [PATCH 0/2] LoongArch: Fix two bugs breaking IFUNC in static PIE
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Binutils mailing list