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: mov{s,z}{b,w,l} suffix guessing

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Jan Beulich <> wrote:
> H.J.,
> i386-opc.tbl has "interesting" comments around these, and the
> assembler as a result provides inconsistent behavior: For one
> because of the recognition of the suffix-less movzb (as the
> only exception). And of course with both instruction groups
> therefore being different from all other instructions with
> register operands. So the question is: Are these inconsistencies
> really intended, or wouldn't it be better to enhance things so
> that at least the final suffix bytes on these two groups won't
> be required anymore? (Clearly when both operands are
> registers, one could even aim at making the second from last
> suffix byte optional too.)
> And if the current (sorry) state is intentional, shouldn't use of
> suffix-less movzb at least get warned about, to pave a road
> towards removing that exception?

Please open a bug with all these issues you found.  We should
investigate them.  If changing them doesn't introduce any test
failures and gcc/glibc/kernel have no issues, we should fix it.



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