From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-qt1-x831.google.com (mail-qt1-x831.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::831])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 046D738582B8
	for <binutils@sourceware.org>; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 17:51:08 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 046D738582B8
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com
Received: by mail-qt1-x831.google.com with SMTP id g11so4097953qts.1
        for <binutils@sourceware.org>; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 10:51:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
        h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references
         :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
        bh=0DInBjVfKsp/rAvYti5RlE9TGsMwt9W09yzNspNDrZQ=;
        b=f9ThnlDhLDcGsc9VhNmCYc+9uWCtu/MSOTR8BmQBiys0B5xj4esMlJ9pKwvOkDwlWf
         RpwaTknYkRmT7n2ho1nQfSXnVKxU2IBVrT18TN2YTbpLQ9cVNh0/F1jrfvP+rxHrGXpA
         3lssFuqrEPj340YwgmLpA6lYTyAQMnh7u2IGvdQGxw9HuN5L9dA5X+3QHEAWPmxui3jK
         +ERHzgcNCqybcJdwEMk9nsF1du1MRP0C/eqMBionVmolcrRpi/ssUTVPRtZ3jakm4IWt
         NKw4CJqt4EQzpC61SHx4DftZO3NW+4+7jxNc8Xgfpc8s0w4voAyq65Q4va16OG3G6uyg
         sJQw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
        h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references
         :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
         :reply-to;
        bh=0DInBjVfKsp/rAvYti5RlE9TGsMwt9W09yzNspNDrZQ=;
        b=FyrkXqtjhWT7/rma+UaayBPsRWIpGBiNv/kMM+sP24n1Q5H75VAkBVCaJa5k2dG0QZ
         FMtomvGDaVjcOpd5jJazq2mw4kZwWG8SGUMZo5yHNt2lMbwCFkQhxddbQZHe4mo2S9oO
         j74A5oPQTXQFZxEI1xSUdGpzpeHFuF1qeCJguDhcCx6+YA6WrhdnXsUYAE+s/d5phnzB
         FjYhnusyl1TGEh1vtOoLcUZiCWxYL/uYDCnfCIbjmQnJWojwAlVo0HZgqzYs4hOOFRfJ
         LCJtma3EV+HcS647ijdrteiR4ei6/L+GbJHMEPI0kFSNo5erbc9cxwLamdfsQCu8hkCJ
         Sj+g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0fClFb7GP8vNdtR4jn+W53u+uN4PsNF5FpuUmBZdXDd9WdzHYD
	b/yPLX0wRfSvWrHD2GxVsRcCeBSw70hDc9l56zk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7QxKEoo83wIHLOmm+wtgWukgl/EN2bNm9JiMLyumamC5iJO8gAYOpzOZSPgZIjS/J9yDaATMBs1EFBPZFoVaY=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5c02:0:b0:39a:bf28:81d7 with SMTP id
 i2-20020ac85c02000000b0039abf2881d7mr7832971qti.437.1665510666826; Tue, 11
 Oct 2022 10:51:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1266f001-4511-2662-dba9-14b4d0317c57@suse.com>
In-Reply-To: <1266f001-4511-2662-dba9-14b4d0317c57@suse.com>
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 10:50:30 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOpBOv5RgErP+5w=8HdUgvSWRZUZCV++-nPQ_1W+Ecu8bA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: drop "regmask" static variable
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3018.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <binutils.sourceware.org>

On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 12:40 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> Replace its two uses by more direct checks, paralleling what's already
> there for SIMD registers.
>
> --- a/gas/config/tc-i386.c
> +++ b/gas/config/tc-i386.c
> @@ -1907,7 +1907,6 @@ operand_type_xor (i386_operand_type x, i
>  static const i386_operand_type anydisp = OPERAND_TYPE_ANYDISP;
>  static const i386_operand_type anyimm = OPERAND_TYPE_ANYIMM;
>  static const i386_operand_type regxmm = OPERAND_TYPE_REGXMM;
> -static const i386_operand_type regmask = OPERAND_TYPE_REGMASK;
>  static const i386_operand_type imm8 = OPERAND_TYPE_IMM8;
>  static const i386_operand_type imm8s = OPERAND_TYPE_IMM8S;
>  static const i386_operand_type imm16 = OPERAND_TYPE_IMM16;
> @@ -8190,7 +8189,7 @@ if(flag_debug) fprintf(stderr, "%s: imm=
>                   || ((op.bitfield.class != Reg
>                        || (!op.bitfield.dword && !op.bitfield.qword))
>                       && op.bitfield.class != RegSIMD
> -                     && !operand_type_equal (&op, &regmask)))
> +                     && op.bitfield.class != RegMask))
>                 abort ();
>               i.vex.register_specifier = i.op[vvvv].regs;
>               dest++;
> @@ -8601,7 +8600,7 @@ if(flag_debug) fprintf(stderr, "%s: imm=
>               if ((type->bitfield.class != Reg
>                    || (!type->bitfield.dword && !type->bitfield.qword))
>                   && type->bitfield.class != RegSIMD
> -                 && !operand_type_equal (type, &regmask))
> +                 && type->bitfield.class != RegMask)
>                 abort ();
>
>               i.vex.register_specifier = i.op[vex_reg].regs;

OK.

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.