From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: "Cui, Lili" <lili.cui@intel.com>
Cc: Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>, Hongtao Liu <crazylht@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: SHLD/SHRD have dual meaning
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 10:45:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7ef5ed97-e1b8-43d6-b369-f8858ddb7ace@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <SJ0PR11MB560099E06545D2591C9B56CE9E122@SJ0PR11MB5600.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 22.04.2024 09:43, Cui, Lili wrote:
>> On 22.04.2024 06:09, Hongtao Liu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 5:29 PM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Since we uniformly permit D suffixes in Intel mode whenever in AT&T
>>>> mode an L suffix may be used, we need to be consistent with this.
>>> I think we need to forbid the D suffix for APX NDD SHL/SHR under Intel
>>> mode to avoid ambiguity.
>>
>> Hmm. Special casing just two insns is out of question imo (in fact that's what
>> is - unintentionally - partly happening prior to the change here).
>>
>>> Neither SHL (always SAL), nor SHR with a D suffix (Intel mode) is
>>> generated by GCC.
>>
>> While this may be deemed helpful, I actually view it as a mistake, even if only
>> from a cosmetic perspective: SHL is the main insn; SAL is merely an alias
>> (questionably using extension opcode 4 rather than 6 in gas).
>>
>> Still extending what you suggest - limiting the restriction to APX - may be an
>> option, albeit ...
>>
>>>> ---
>>>> The alternative, more intrusive and more risky (in terms of perceived
>>>> or even real regressions) route would be to mark the few insns which
>>>> permit suffixes even in Intel syntax, and reject suffix uses when
>>>> that indicator isn't set.
>>
>> ... as implied here I'd still consider this inconsistent.
>>
>> Furthermore the point in time when suffixes are processed off of the
>> incoming mnemonic is too early to know whether an insn is having an APX
>> representation. Hence doing said extension of what you suggest would likely
>> end up quite hacky.
>>
>
> If the user messes them up, we can't figure out the original intention because the input is exactly the same, maybe we can find a suitable place to inform the user that shl + apx ndd does not support suffix?
See my other reply to Hongtao. Plus, as said before, I'd much prefer if we
wouldn't start special-casing any specific insns in this regard. (Which
isn't to say that may not end up being necessary here.)
Jan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-22 8:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-19 9:28 Jan Beulich
2024-04-22 4:09 ` Hongtao Liu
2024-04-22 6:51 ` Jan Beulich
2024-04-22 7:43 ` Cui, Lili
2024-04-22 7:47 ` Hongtao Liu
2024-04-22 8:42 ` Jan Beulich
2024-04-22 11:36 ` Hongtao Liu
2024-04-22 8:45 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7ef5ed97-e1b8-43d6-b369-f8858ddb7ace@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=crazylht@gmail.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=lili.cui@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).