Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86/Intel: correct disassembly of fsub*/fdiv*

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:42 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 07.03.18 at 10:49, <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>> fsub/fsubr/fsubp/fsubrp as well as fdiv/fdivr/fdivp/fdivrp disassembly
>> should match (a) the Intel SDM and (b) respective input fed to gas (both
>> of course with the exception of when we intentionally convert bogus
>> insns, accompanied by a warning).
>>
>> gas/
>> 2018-03-07  Jan Beulich  <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>
>>       * testsuite/gas/i386/intel-intel.d: New.
>>       * testsuite/gas/i386/i386.exp: Run new test.
>>
>> opcodes/
>> 2018-03-07  Jan Beulich  <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>
>>       * i386-dis.c (float_reg): Adjust DC and DE fsub*/fdiv* patterns.
>>
>> ---
>> The logic behind -M{intel,att}{,-mnemonic} is bogus anyway, so there's
>> the alternative of getting that straight: There's no such thing like
>> Intel syntax with AT&T mnemonics (and the instances of ATTMnemonic
>> without ATTSyntax in the opcode table look all bogus too). Instead there
>> are only three sensible modes: Intel syntax, AT&T syntax with AT&T
>> mnemonics, and AT&T syntax with Intel mnemonics. Hence an alternative
>> fix would be to correct command line option handling, which is quite odd
>> anyway - to get objdump to produce AT&T syntax with Intel mnemonics one
>> has to pass "-Mintel-mnemonic -Matt" instead of the more logical
>> "-Matt -Mintel-mnemonic" (ideally the order wouldn't matter at all).
>
> Btw, do you have any comment on this part?

Sounds reasonable.  Can you submit a patch?

Thanks.


-- 
H.J.