From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-81458-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 12441 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2013 15:32:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <binutils.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 12432 invoked by uid 89); 8 Oct 2013 15:32:04 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPAM_SUBJECT,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-ob0-f178.google.com
Received: from mail-ob0-f178.google.com (HELO mail-ob0-f178.google.com) (209.85.214.178) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 15:32:04 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id uz6so602628obc.37        for <binutils@sourceware.org>; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 08:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.1.196 with SMTP id 4mr498093obo.69.1381246322422; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 08:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.110.15 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 08:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <52543EE302000078000F9AF4@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
References: <5254349502000078000F9A3D@nat28.tlf.novell.com>	<525435BC02000078000F9A51@nat28.tlf.novell.com>	<CAMe9rOrZuQRgcaUNgex=MDFjKYxsJimK1aCMqzEyM2XbZXCo4w@mail.gmail.com>	<52543EE302000078000F9AF4@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 15:32:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOo82eK4oS8YAPKS0DDRktyiCUc16OqxDH4ujihKjmA7vA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] x86/MPX: fix address size handling
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: kirill.yukhin@intel.com, Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00082.txt.bz2

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 08.10.13 at 17:15, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>> While address overrides are ignored in 64-bit mode (and hence shouldn't
>>> result in an error), trying to use 16-bit addressing is documented to
>>> result in #UD, and hence the assembler should reject the attempt.
>>>
>>> gas/
>>> 2013-10-08  Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>>
>>>         * tc-i386.c (md_assemble): Alter address size checking for MPX
>>>         instructions.
>>>
>>> --- 2013-10-07/gas/config/tc-i386.c
>>> +++ 2013-10-07/gas/config/tc-i386.c
>>> @@ -3549,10 +3549,15 @@ md_assemble (char *line)
>>>    if (i.bnd_prefix && !i.tm.opcode_modifier.bndprefixok)
>>>      as_bad (_("expecting valid branch instruction after `bnd'"));
>>>
>>> -  if (i.tm.cpu_flags.bitfield.cpumpx
>>> -      && flag_code == CODE_64BIT
>>> -      && i.prefix[ADDR_PREFIX])
>>> -    as_bad (_("32-bit address isn't allowed in 64-bit MPX instructions."));
>>
>> It is done on purpose.  When 32-bit address prefix in 64-bit is ignored,
>> MPX doesn't work correctly for x32.
>
> I don't understand: It _is_ being ignored by the hardware as per
> the documentation. So x32 need to get along with that. Maybe
> an example would help, so I could understand why you think
> this _needs_ to be an error...
>

X32 won't work with MPX since hardware assumes pointer
size is always 64 bit in 64-bit mode with or without address
size prefix.  MPX depends on correct pointer size to work.
I don't want people to use MPX in x32 by accident.

-- 
H.J.