[PATCH] Support APX CCMP and CTEST

[Jan Beulich]

On 29.05.2024 13:05, Cui, Lili wrote:
>>>>>>> +	      i.oszc_flags |= (1 << CF);
>>>>>>> +	      break;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Shouldn't you further reject redundant settings, as in
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 	ccmpe {dfv=cf,cf} ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> How about keeping this compatibility? Like any other pseudo prefix.
>>>>
>>>> Which "compatibility"? And why the reference to pseudo prefixes when
>>>> here we're dealing with something entirely new, a pseudo suffix?
>>>> Within a single {dfv=...} each flag should be mentioned at most once.
>>>> Anything else is a potential indication of a mistake the programmer made.
>>>> Separately from this we may consider whether to permit more than one
>>>> {dfv=...} for a single insn, with the latter than fully replacing the
>>>> former's effects. Personally I'd recommend against that unless a
>>>> clear use case could be provided, but I wouldn't object to such being done
>> right away.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's a suffix, but I think we can tolerate multiple repetitions of a flag by just
>> overwriting the previous one with the next one. Like the pseudo-prefix {vex}
>> {vex} . If you insist on giving {dfv=cf,cf}  an error, I'd just put a check before the
>> assignment.
>>
>> Well, if you think it may be useful, make it just a warning? Part of my desire to
>> see this diagnosed is related to your use of "overwriting" in the reply:
>> There's no real overwriting; things can only be cumulative here, as there's no
>> way to specify the clearing of one of the flags. Any flags to be cleared are
>> indicated as such by simply not mentioning them at all.
>>
> 
> Yes, "overright" is not the right word. How about this?
> 
> +static INLINE void set_oszc_flags (unsigned int oszc_shift)
> +{
> +  if (i.oszc_flags && (1 << oszc_shift))

With && replaced by & here ...

> +    as_bad (_("same oszc flag used twice"));
> +  i.oszc_flags |= 1 << oszc_shift;
> +}
> +
>  /* Handle SCC OSZC flags.  */
> 
>  static int
> @@ -1999,16 +2006,16 @@ check_Scc_OszcOperations (const char *l)
>            switch (suffix_string[0])
>              {
>              case 'o':
> -              i.oszc_flags |= (1 << OF);
> +             set_oszc_flags (OF);
>                break;
>              case 's':
> -              i.oszc_flags |= (1 << SF);
> +             set_oszc_flags (SF);
>                break;
>              case 'z':
> -              i.oszc_flags |= (1 << ZF);
> +             set_oszc_flags (ZF);
>                break;
>              case 'c':
> -              i.oszc_flags |= (1 << CF);
> +             set_oszc_flags (CF);
>                break;
>              default:

... this looks okay to me (still pending the rename of the constant names,
though).

Jan