x86: Support Intel UINTR

[H.J. Lu]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 8:34 PM Cui, Lili <lili.cui@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 2:33 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 13.10.2020 11:00, Cui, Lili wrote:
> > > >> On 13.10.2020 08:11, Cui, Lili wrote:
> > > >>> --- a/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/prefix.s
> > > >>> +++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/prefix.s
> > > >>> @@ -367,14 +367,6 @@
> > > >>>
> > > >>>     nop
> > > >>>
> > > >>> -# repz; rdrand %eax
> > > >>> -   .byte 0xf3
> > > >>> -   .byte 0x0f
> > > >>> -   .byte 0xc7
> > > >>> -   .byte 0xf0
> > > >>> -
> > > >>> -   nop
> > > >>> -
> > > >>
> > > >> Instead of outright dropping this, can you see about finding a
> > > >> suitable replacement encoding to retain what's being tested here?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your review, I tried but didn't find a replaceable
> > > > encoding here，
> > > > as RDRAND not support F2/F3 prefixes, so H.J added an invalid test
> > > > case(repz rdrand %eax) here, "repz rdrand" encoding is same with
> > "senduipi",  so I have to delete this testcase.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Rdrand  NFx REX.W + 0F C7 /6
> > > >
> > > > NFx ? Indicates the use of F2/F3 prefixes (beyond those already part
> > > > of the instructions opcode) are not allowed with the instruction.
> > > > Such use will either cause an invalid-opcode exception (#UD) or result in the
> > encoding for a different instruction.
> > >
> > > Question is whether HJ really mean to test the RDRAND major opcode
> > > specifically, or whether some other one could be use in its stead.
> > > HJ?
> > >
> > > Jan
> >
> > Please drop
> >
> >         * testsuite/gas/i386/prefix.d: There is a test
> >         case binary conflict with senduipi opcode delete it.
> >         * testsuite/gas/i386/prefix.s: Likewise.
> >
> > since they are no longer needed.
> >
> > --
> > H.J.
>
> Done, Thanks.
>

OK.

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.