This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH, v2] gas/x86: don't allow invalid operand combinations for VGATHER

On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Jan Beulich <> wrote:
>>>> On 31.07.12 at 17:43, "H.J. Lu" <> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Jan Beulich <> wrote:
>>>>>> On 30.07.12 at 18:10, "H.J. Lu" <> wrote:
>>>> The assembler should only check the operands which can't be
>>>> encoded.  It should shouldn't check if operands are functional
>>>> correct.  However, I don't mind to issue an error which is controlled
>>>> by a command line option.
>>> Hmm, not sure. Is there any precedent to such behavior? I as a
>>> programmer would appreciate if the assembler rejected anything
>>> that's invalid.
>>> In the case you stay on that position, would making the new
>>> diagnostic an unconditional warning be acceptable instead?
>> Can you also add a command line option to turn it off and
>> turn warning into error?
> How about this then?
> Jan
> The VGATHER group of instructions requires that all three involved
> xmm/ymm registers are distinct. This patch adds code to check for this,
> and at once eliminates a superfluous check for not using PC-relative
> addressing for these instructions (the fact that an index register is
> required here already excludes valid PC-relative addresses). The
> severity of the resulting diagnostics can be controlled via command
> line option or directive.


vgatherdps %xmm2,(%rax,%xmm1,2),%xmm2

can't be used?  XMM2 can be used for both mask and


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]