RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly

[Jan Beulich]

On 05.05.2026 10:33, Nick Clifton wrote:
>> Already when reading Michael's v1 comment I wondered: How's handling of
>> multiple comments going to work?
> 
> Yeah .. I don't know :-)
> 
>> Surely we want to switch the present
>> %rip-relative operand printing to the new cappend_*() model.
> 
> That was going to be my next step.
> 
>> Hence both
>> that and an immediate may want to have a comment added. Presumably those
>> would want to appear in the same order as the operands, which are
>> printed in different order for AT&T vs Intel syntax.
> 
> Ah, OK, this is beyond my x86 expertise.  Maybe a real x86 maintainer
> would like to take over ?

Perhaps I can, if this isn't overly urgent. As long as only one comment is
there per line, things are fine (I think/hope). So you could get your work
in, for me to then take it from there. (Please just drop me a note when
you committed your changes, so I'm aware without needing to actively track
things.)

Btw, seeing the Cc list, I can't help finally asking: Shouldn't the x86_64
maintainer list be pruned? Neither Jan nor Andreas have been doing much in
the last so many years, and typically they also aren't Cc-ed (anymore) on
patches afaict. Jan, Andreas - primarily it would be your call, of course.

Jan