[PATCH v3] Support AVX10_V2_AUX instructions
Jan Beulich
jbeulich@suse.com
Thu Aug 27 11:23:12 GMT 2026
On 27.08.2026 09:13, Jiang, Haochen wrote:
>> From: Rohan Shenoy <RohanRadhesh.Shenoy@amd.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2026 2:44 PM
>>
>> diff --git a/opcodes/i386-dis-evex-prefix.h b/opcodes/i386-dis-evex-prefix.h
>> index 1aeac210c5d..0135703912a 100644
>> --- a/opcodes/i386-dis-evex-prefix.h
>> +++ b/opcodes/i386-dis-evex-prefix.h
>> + /* PREFIX_EVEX_MAP5_3C_W_0 */
>> + {
>> + { Bad_Opcode },
>> + { "vcvthf82hf6s", { XM, Ux }, 0 },
>> + },
>> + /* PREFIX_EVEX_MAP5_3D */
>> + {
>> + { Bad_Opcode },
>> + { "vcvt%HB82bf4s", { EXxmmq, XM }, 0 },
>> + },
>> + /* PREFIX_EVEX_MAP5_3E_W_1 */
>> + {
>> + { Bad_Opcode },
>> + { "vcvtbf82bf6s", { XM, Ux }, 0 },
>> + },
>
>
> We need to hold the patch (or part of the patch) for these
> insns.
>
> This line
>> + { "vcvt%HB82bf4s", { EXxmmq, XM }, 0 },
> is not matching the documentation where documentation
> uses modrm.reg for operand1 and modrm.r/m for operand2.
> It is a documentation bug since we have memory for operand1.
>
> While for those FP8 to FP6 insns, I am not sure if the current
> documentation is the correct version. I saw a version using
> modrm.r/m for operand1 and modrm.reg for operand2, where
> current SDE is also using this version.
In fact doc version 1.15 section 9.4.2 is inconsistent in itself here:
Form
xmm1/m64, xmm2
xmm1/m128, ymm2
ymm1/m256, zmm2
vs
Instruction Operand 1 Operand 2 Operand 3
VCVTBF82BF4S
VCVTHF82BF4S MODRM.REG(w) MODRM.R/M(r) N/A
Jan
More information about the Binutils
mailing list