This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich at suse dot com>
- Cc: Kirill Yukhin <kirill dot yukhin at gmail dot com>, Christian Ludloff <ludloff at google dot com>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa at zytor dot com>
- Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 08:11:58 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <552FE0630200007800072CD0 at mail dot emea dot novell dot com> <CAMe9rOomWLMwQT6R2qLr1p7_dzmwuNLsz2PEk-6tV3NTt_=24Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <55390A6A0200007800075263 at mail dot emea dot novell dot com> <CAMe9rOrSX3cgXCSJFsbDnKgnyNrX-Y4cYO2VL4uTrKV-O3fcCw at mail dot gmail dot com> <554906C70200007800076D28 at mail dot emea dot novell dot com> <CAMe9rOp2bUnsU+Tn4RKLNw48h6JGiaGaX1ddqpGhyM3tsF7pTg at mail dot gmail dot com> <5549E2820200007800076F5F at mail dot emea dot novell dot com> <555D9794020000780007C89A at mail dot emea dot novell dot com> <CAMe9rOoe8s+3iPvpbhF2p=c96zyvYijQ9eqs+4Gx5biF1E80OA at mail dot gmail dot com> <555DDF7B020000780007CB72 at mail dot emea dot novell dot com> <CAMe9rOrxdYQUSbwX9Vw-5TCcPsa+BYKgn9S740NeOAqMKKKr6A at mail dot gmail dot com> <555E0FB5020000780007CCCE at mail dot emea dot novell dot com>
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 21.05.15 at 14:07, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I checked with our SDM people and was told that
>>
>> ---
>> Intel Software Developer Manual only governs the output side of the binary
>> form of instruction byte stream matches what HW expect. Each assembly
>> tool product has its own implementation of transforming the input
>> language/dialect into the output stream.
>> ---
>
> Of course. But I don't think you're going to deny that what it (or
> really its ancient predecessors) specified has been taken by
> assembler implementations as reference.
Intel SDM is NOT an assembler reference manual. Please stop
making it into one.
>> Intel syntax supported by GNU assembler is what is implemented
>> in GNU assembler. Given that there is nothing we can be compatible
>> with, we don't want to change it.
>
> I clearly disagree to this last statement, and I think you saying so
> contradicts you having pulled in people maintaining other assemblers
> apparently in the hope that they would support your position (which
> they didn't, at least not publicly, i.e. not visible to me).
It simply means that they don't care.
> Furthermore you once again ignore the fact that the assembler
> after my proposed changes isn't going to reject the previously
> supported format, it merely _also_ supports the SDM specified
> variant. Hence I don't see the change breaking anything, and I
> continue having a hard time understanding your position in the
> first place.
>
We don't want to introduce new syntax which isn't used by
ANYONE.
--
H.J.
- References:
- Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}
- Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}