[PATCH 5/7] x86: re-work insn/suffix recognition

[Jan Beulich]

On 27.09.2022 01:52, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Sorry for the delay.  I was on vacation.  My main concern is to call
> strdup and free for each instruction.   I prefer to add new entries to
> deal with rare cases instead of penalizing all instructions.

Hmm, I think I can take care of this concern: As it looks, at least
parse_insn() leaves the input buffer undisturbed, so minimally I ought
to be able to limit the strdup() to just a very small set of
mnemonics. I'm not sure yet if I may even be able to avoid the copying
altogether; I'll have to check quite carefully in particular
parse_operands() and the functions it calls. But perhaps relying on
this would be risky looking forward, so I guess we better don't make
assumptions here and instead flag mnemonics (in the templates) where
retrying may be necessary when no match was found during the 1st pass.

FTAOD - I take it calling free() with a NULL argument is not a concern?

I guess to prove (and going forward guarantee) the apparent behavior of
parse_insn() I'd like to constify its first parameter. This might
involve adding a cast (to drop const-ness again after the call), which
I generally would like to avoid, or some "interesting" pointer
arithmetic. If you have any opinion here up front, please let me know.

Jan