public inbox for binutils@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jiang, Haochen" <haochen.jiang@intel.com>
To: "Beulich, Jan" <JBeulich@suse.com>,
	"hjl.tools@gmail.com" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: "Zhang, Jun" <jun.zhang@intel.com>,
	"binutils@sourceware.org" <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86: Add Evw to emit w suffix for several instrctions for word ptr
Date: Wed, 31 May 2023 05:48:32 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <SA1PR11MB5946E0AF801D560C642BD9EEEC489@SA1PR11MB5946.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31f33bf7-2809-2199-9877-167854324924@suse.com>

> >> Maybe I got some wrong understanding on that. It comes from the
> >> current testcase.
> >> Trying to clarify that on disassembler.
> >>
> >> Let's take lldt as example. Will 0f00d2 emit eax register or ax register for
> lldt?
> >
> > One thing to add the current behavior for disassembler or trunk is to
> > emit ax register. Which I mean always is to as always with other instructions.
> 
> I'm afraid I don't really get what you concern is. Yes, ...

I mean, for bytecode 0f00d2, should it emit 'lldt %ax' or 'lldt %eax'?

Currently, in the testcase, it emits 'lldt %ax'. I suppose it actually fits documentation
and we should not change it.

BTW, I read SDM today again, for SLDT/STR, they have the exact explanation for
handling of r32/r64.

For STR, we have:
"When the destination operand is a 32-bit register, ..."
"In 64-bit mode, operation is the same. The size of the memory operand is fixed at 16 bits.
In register stores, the 2-byte TR is zero extended if stored to a 64-bit register."

For SLDT, we have:
"Outside IA-32e mode, when the destination operand is a 32-bit register,..."
"In compatibility mode, when the destination operand is a 32-bit register,..."
"In 64-bit mode, using a REX prefix in the form of REX.R permits access to additional
registers (R8-R15). "

But for LLDT/LTR/VERW/VERR, things are different. The operands at least will be fixed at 16 bits
in 64-bit mode.
For LLDT, we have:
"The operand-size attribute has no effect on this instruction.
The LLDT instruction is provided for use in operating-system software; it should not be used
in application programs. This instruction can only be executed in protected mode or 64-bit mode.
In 64-bit mode, the operand size is fixed at 16 bits."

For LTR, we have:
"The operand-size attribute has no effect on this instruction.
In 64-bit mode, the operand size is still fixed at 16 bits."

For VERR/VERW, we have:
"This instruction’s operation is the same in non-64-bit modes and 64-bit mode. The operand size
is fixed at 16 bits."

Therefore, I suppose for VERR/VERW, the 32/64 bit register should never be allowed under any
circumstances. For LLDT/LTR, in 64-bit mode, it should also the same conclusion. In protected mode
and compatibility mode, it is questionable. The current implementation of assembler might need a
fix.

H.J., what is your opinion?

Haochen

> 
> >> If we need a 66 in bytecode to emit ax register as always, Sv+D fits the
> need.
> >> And then the only thing we might need to do is to adjust the current
> testcase.
> 
> ... some existing disassembly testcases will likely need adjusting.
> 
> Jan

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-31  5:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-22  6:07 [PATCH v2] Support Intel FRED LKGS Zhang, Jun
2023-05-22  9:11 ` Jan Beulich
2023-05-24  6:36   ` Jiang, Haochen
2023-05-25  7:57     ` Jiang, Haochen
2023-05-25  8:42       ` Jan Beulich
2023-05-26  6:50         ` Jiang, Haochen
2023-05-26  7:00           ` Jan Beulich
2023-05-26  8:26             ` [PATCH] x86: Add Evw to emit w suffix for several instrctions for word ptr Haochen Jiang
2023-05-26  8:46               ` Jan Beulich
2023-05-26  8:54                 ` Jiang, Haochen
2023-05-26 10:52                   ` Jan Beulich
2023-05-29  2:01                     ` Jiang, Haochen
2023-05-29  2:08                       ` Jiang, Haochen
2023-05-30  8:09                         ` Jan Beulich
2023-05-31  5:48                           ` Jiang, Haochen [this message]
2023-05-31  8:43                             ` Jan Beulich
2023-06-01  2:14               ` H.J. Lu

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=SA1PR11MB5946E0AF801D560C642BD9EEEC489@SA1PR11MB5946.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=haochen.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    --cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=jun.zhang@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).