[PATCH] gas/x86-64: properly distinguish low and high register ranges

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 30.07.12 at 18:04, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 24.07.12 at 16:16, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Can you add some testcases?
>>
>> I knew you would ask this, but sorry, this makes no sense - if test
>> cases would are desirable here, they shouldn't be testing just the
>> things that this patch fixes, but also any other invalid operand
>> combinations. As an example - why would testing that "xlat [r11]"
>> isn't accepted be needed, but not e.g. "xlat [ecx]"?
>>
>> Furthermore, this fixes actually broken behavior, so accepting
>> the change shouldn't be dependent upon test case availability.
> 
> What broken behavior does this change fix?

I gave an example above - xlat [r11]. Other similar examples
involve other string instructions requiring fixed registers as
well as the one or two instructions requiring xmm0/ymm0 as
their first/last operand.

> Why hasn't it been tested in the testsuite?

Don't know.

Jan