[PATCH v3 03/13] bfd/RISC-V: Zvfbfwma implies Zvfbfmin

Jan Beulich jbeulich@suse.com
Fri Jun 19 11:48:10 GMT 2026


This is pretty clear from the spec.
---
While the spec is also explicit there: I would have expected Zvfbfmin (not
Zvfbfwma) to be what implies Zfbfmin. Is there an explanation for this?

--- a/bfd/elfxx-riscv.c
+++ b/bfd/elfxx-riscv.c
@@ -1232,7 +1232,7 @@ static const struct riscv_implicit_subse
   {"v", "+zve64d,+zvl128b", check_implicit_always},
   {"zvfh", "+zvfhmin,+zfhmin", check_implicit_always},
   {"zvfhmin", "+zve32f", check_implicit_always},
-  {"zvfbfwma", "+zve32f,+zfbfmin", check_implicit_always},
+  {"zvfbfwma", "+zfbfmin,+zvfbfmin", check_implicit_always},
   {"zvfbfmin", "+zve32f", check_implicit_always},
   {"zve64d", "+d,+zve64f", check_implicit_always},
   {"zve64f", "+zve32f,+zve64x,+zvl64b", check_implicit_always},
--- a/gas/testsuite/gas/riscv/imply.d
+++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/riscv/imply.d
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ SYMBOL TABLE:
 [0-9a-f]+ l       .text	0+000 \$xrv32i2p1_f2p2_d2p2_v1p0_zicsr2p0_zve32f1p0_zve32x1p0_zve64d1p0_zve64f1p0_zve64x1p0_zvl128b1p0_zvl32b1p0_zvl64b1p0
 [0-9a-f]+ l       .text	0+000 \$xrv32i2p1_f2p2_zicsr2p0_zfhmin1p0_zve32f1p0_zve32x1p0_zvfh1p0_zvfhmin1p0_zvl32b1p0
 [0-9a-f]+ l       .text	0+000 \$xrv32i2p1_f2p2_zicsr2p0_zve32f1p0_zve32x1p0_zvfhmin1p0_zvl32b1p0
-[0-9a-f]+ l       .text	0+000 \$xrv32i2p1_f2p2_zicsr2p0_zfbfmin1p0_zfhmin1p0_zve32f1p0_zve32x1p0_zvfbfwma1p0_zvl32b1p0
+[0-9a-f]+ l       .text	0+000 \$xrv32i2p1_f2p2_zicsr2p0_zfbfmin1p0_zfhmin1p0_zve32f1p0_zve32x1p0_zvfbfmin1p0_zvfbfwma1p0_zvl32b1p0
 [0-9a-f]+ l       .text	0+000 \$xrv32i2p1_f2p2_zicsr2p0_zve32f1p0_zve32x1p0_zvfbfmin1p0_zvl32b1p0
 [0-9a-f]+ l       .text	0+000 \$xrv32i2p1_f2p2_d2p2_zicsr2p0_zve32f1p0_zve32x1p0_zve64d1p0_zve64f1p0_zve64x1p0_zvl32b1p0_zvl64b1p0
 [0-9a-f]+ l       .text	0+000 \$xrv32i2p1_f2p2_zicsr2p0_zve32f1p0_zve32x1p0_zve64f1p0_zve64x1p0_zvl32b1p0_zvl64b1p0



More information about the Binutils mailing list