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 10/10] x86: correct VFPCLASSP{S,D} operand size handling

On 09.08.2019 19:13,  H.J. Lu  wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 8:58 AM Jan Beulich <> wrote:
On 09.08.2019 16:57,  H.J. Lu  wrote:
When I see

22   vfpclasspd $0, (%eax), %k0

I can't tell what the memory size is.

Excuse me, but when you go through source code it is assumed
that you know what your source code means and does. No-one

The assembly source code can come from anywhere.

requires you to omit the suffix. But equally no-one should be
required to specify a suffix just to meet your taste.

These instructions can take different memory sizes.  One should
be able to tell what the memory size is by looking at it. Is that too
much to ask?

This is not too much to ask, but is a decision of the programmers
writing assembly code, not something to enforce by gas. Once
again - given the context things may be entirely unambiguous. I
can only re-emphasize that as a maintainer you should weigh your
personal preferences against what others may think, want, or need.

Let me be frank here: If you continue to refuse to allow this
change in, I'll have to make it work correctly for Intel syntax
mode only (which requires more code for no gain), just to avoid
the need to have you ack the change. I don't think though that
this would be a good course of action.

I find it quite interesting that you didn't even care to comment
on this part.


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