This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] x86: don't allow invalid operand combinations for VGATHER

>>> On 30.07.12 at 18:10, "H.J. Lu" <> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:18 AM, Jan Beulich <> wrote:
>> The VGATHER group of instructions requires that all three involved
>> xmm/ymm registers are distinct. This patch adds code to check for this,
>> and at once eliminates a superfluous check for not using PC-relative
>> addressing for these instructions (the fact that an index register is
>> required here already excludes valid PC-relative addresses).
> The assembler should only check the operands which can't be
> encoded.  It should shouldn't check if operands are functional
> correct.  However, I don't mind to issue an error which is controlled
> by a command line option.

Hmm, not sure. Is there any precedent to such behavior? I as a
programmer would appreciate if the assembler rejected anything
that's invalid.

In the case you stay on that position, would making the new
diagnostic an unconditional warning be acceptable instead?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]