Re: [PATCH] x86: imply all No_*Suf when none is set in a template

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:35 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On 14.11.2019 20:26, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:51 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Since no template would ever allow for none of them to be set, reduce
> >> table size and improve readability and hence maintainability by implying
> >> all of them to be set when a template specifies none.
> >>
> >> opcodes/
> >> 2019-11-XX  Jan Beulich  <jbeulich@suse.com>
> >>
> >>         * i386-gen.c (process_i386_opcode_modifier): Widen scope of
> >>         bwlq_suf. New local variable other_suf. Emit warning when all
> >>         No_*Suf are set. Set all No_*Suf when none are set.
> >>         * i386-opc.tbl: Drop No_bSuf, No_wSuf, No_lSuf, No_sSuf,
> >>         No_qSuf, and No_ldSuf when they're all specified at the same
> >>         time.
> >
> > I don't think it may the table more readable.   Why not simply add
> >
> > #define  No_Suf  No_bSuf|No_wSuf|No_lSuf|No_sSuf|No_qSuf|No_ldSuf
> >
> > and use it?
>
> Because this would require yet another global change once we switch
> to positive identification of the permitted suffixes (which should
> have been done from the beginning imo). Since the set of suffixes
> that can go together is pretty limited (i.e. a fair subset of the
> combinations currently possible to specify do never occur), my plan
> is to switch to an enumeration here, containing enumerators like
> bwlqSuf or wlqSuf.
>

Replace or remove No_Suf should be very easy.

-- 
H.J.