public inbox for binutils@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Cui, Lili" <lili.cui@intel.com>
To: "Beulich, Jan" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "Lu, Hongjiu" <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>,
	"Kong, Lingling" <lingling.kong@intel.com>,
	"binutils@sourceware.org" <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 4/8] Support APX NDD
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 15:49:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <SJ0PR11MB5600510F072A41597C3E26FD9EDEA@SJ0PR11MB5600.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86df39d7-e555-7362-5e2e-ed9e22661407@suse.com>

> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] Support APX NDD
> 
> On 25.10.2023 10:10, Cui, Lili wrote:
> >> On 22.10.2023 16:05, Cui, Lili wrote:
> >>>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>>> +++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-apx-ndd.s
> >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
> >>>>> +# Check 64bit APX NDD instructions with evex prefix encoding
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +	.allow_index_reg
> >>>>> +	.text
> >>>>> +_start:
> >>>>> +cmovge 0x90909090(%eax),%edx,%r8d cmovle
> >>>>> +0x90909090(%eax),%edx,%r8d cmovg  0x90909090(%eax),%edx,%r8d
> >>>>> +imul   0x90909(%eax),%edx,%r8d
> >>>>> +imul   0x909(%rax,%r31,8),%rdx,%r25
> >>>>
> >>>> What about imul by immediate? The present spec is quite unclear there:
> >>>> The insn page says {ND=ZU} and the table says 0/1 in the ND column.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> We don't support it yet, I put it in RFC.
> >>> ...
> >>> 2. Support APX ZU   -- In progress
> >>> 3. Support APX CCMP and CTEST -- In progress ...
> >>>
> >>> About 0/1 in the ND column, it means ZU can be 0/1.
> >>>
> >>> IMUL with opcodes 0x69 and 0x6B in map 0 and SETcc instructions
> >>> Although these instructions do not support NDD, the EVEX.ND bit is
> >>> used to control whether its destination register has its upper bits
> >>> (namely,
> >> bits [63:OSIZE]) zeroed when OSIZE is 8b or 16b.
> >>> That is, if EVEX.ND = 1, the upper bits are always zeroed;
> >>> otherwise, they keep the old values when OSIZE is 8b or 16b. For
> >>> these instructions,
> >> EVEX.[V4,V3,V2,V1,V0] must be all zero.
> >>
> >> So ZU indeed isn't just a typo there. For 32- and 64-bit forms, is
> >> EVEX.ND then simply being ignored? The ZU really is meaningful only for
> 16-bit forms, aiui ...
> >>
> >
> > EVEX.ZU should be ignored for 32-bit and 64-bit forms. For imul (in spec 6.30
> IMUL), EVEX.ND stands for ND or ZU.
> 
> In cases like this, where ignoring bits is kind of unexpected, the spec would
> better say explicitly (on the instruction page) when a meaningless bit is indeed
> ignored, rather than being reserved and causing #UD. Note how even the text
> in the APX-EVEX-INT section leaves open (or at least ambiguous, by not
> mentioning the case) whether SETcc with a memory operand ignores EVEX.ND
> or causes #UD when the bit is set.
> 

Sorry, my previous answer was inaccurate, EVEX.ZU will not be ignored in 32-bit and 64-bit forms.

Prior to Intel® APX, the following rules apply in 64-bit mode when an instruction’s destination is a GPR and
OSIZE < 64b:
1. If OSIZE is 32b, the destination GPR gets the instruction’s result in bits [31:0] and all zeros in bits
[63:32].
2. If OSIZE is 8b or 16b, the destination GPR gets the instruction’s result in bits [OSIZE-1:0] but keep its
old value in bits [63:OSIZE].

The ZU indication described in items 2.(b) of Section 3.1.2.3.1 does not introduce an NDD. For those
instructions, EVEX.ND=0 keeps the current x86 behavior, but EVEX.ND=1 forces the zeroing of bits
[63:OSIZE] for any OSIZE < 64b

> > I think ZU makes sense for both the 16-bit form (imul) and the 8-bit form
> (setcc, I'm not sure if imul supports it yet).
> 
> No, IMUL by immediate (or actually any IMUL with multiple operands) doesn't
> support byte register operands. For SETcc the ZU aspect is pretty clear and
> doesn't even need expressing by new syntax in (dis)assembly - you can simply
> distinguish the two forms by using either 8-bit registers (no ZU) or 32-/64-bit
> ones (with ZU). In principle that's possible with IMUL as well, of course, but it
> may be deemed a little odd:
> 
> 	imul	$17, %dx, %cx
> 	imul	$17, %dx, %ecx
> 
> Yet personally I'd still prefer this over adding e.g. {zu} on either the mnemonic
> or the destination operand. Question (as with the way to express
> {nf}) is how other assemblers are going to handle it. (Would be quite nice if
> the spec could at least give more clear hints towards suggested syntax, but
> that hadn't been the case already with the syntax extensions needed for
> AVX512.)
> 
 
I will add suffix “zx” (for the Intel syntax) or “zwq” (for the AT&T syntax) to the mnemonic:

Intel syntax                                              AT&T syntax
imulzx rax, word ptr[ rbx ], 0xab         imulzwq $0xab, (%rbx), %rax

Lili.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-10-25 15:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 84+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-19 15:25 [PATCH 0/8] [RFC] Support Intel APX EGPR Cui, Lili
2023-09-19 15:25 ` [PATCH 1/8] Support APX GPR32 with rex2 prefix Cui, Lili
2023-09-21 15:27   ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-27 15:57     ` Cui, Lili
2023-09-21 15:51   ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-27 15:59     ` Cui, Lili
2023-09-28  8:02       ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-07  3:27         ` Cui, Lili
2023-09-19 15:25 ` [PATCH 2/8] Support APX GPR32 with extend evex prefix Cui, Lili
2023-09-22 10:12   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-17 15:48     ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-18  6:40       ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-18 10:44         ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-18 10:50           ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-22 10:50   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-17 15:50     ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-17 16:11       ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-18  2:02         ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-18  6:10           ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-25  6:03   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-17 15:52     ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-17 16:12       ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-18  6:31         ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-18  6:47           ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-18  7:52             ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-18  8:21               ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-18 11:30                 ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-19 11:58                   ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-19 15:24                     ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-19 16:38                       ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-20  6:25                         ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-22 14:33                           ` Cui, Lili
2023-09-19 15:25 ` [PATCH 3/8] Add tests for " Cui, Lili
2023-09-27 13:11   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-17 15:53     ` FW: " Cui, Lili
2023-10-17 16:19       ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-18  2:32         ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-18  6:05           ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-18  7:16             ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-18  8:05               ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-18 11:26                 ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-18 12:06                   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-25 16:03                     ` Cui, Lili
2023-09-27 13:19   ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-19 15:25 ` [PATCH 4/8] Support APX NDD Cui, Lili
2023-09-27 14:44   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-22 14:05     ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-23  7:12       ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-25  8:10         ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-25  8:47           ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-25 15:49             ` Cui, Lili [this message]
2023-10-25 15:59               ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-28  7:57   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-22 14:57     ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-24 11:39     ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-24 11:58       ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-25 15:29         ` Cui, Lili
2023-09-19 15:25 ` [PATCH 5/8] Support APX NDD optimized encoding Cui, Lili
2023-09-28  9:29   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-23  2:57     ` Hu, Lin1
2023-10-23  7:23       ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-23  7:50         ` Hu, Lin1
2023-10-23  8:15           ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-24  1:40             ` Hu, Lin1
2023-10-24  6:03               ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-24  6:08                 ` Hu, Lin1
2023-10-23  3:07     ` [PATCH-V2] " Hu, Lin1
2023-10-23  3:30     ` [PATCH 5/8] [v2] " Hu, Lin1
2023-10-23  7:26       ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-19 15:25 ` [PATCH 6/8] Support APX Push2/Pop2 Cui, Lili
2023-09-28 11:37   ` Jan Beulich
2023-10-30 15:21     ` Cui, Lili
2023-10-30 15:31       ` Jan Beulich
2023-11-20 13:05         ` Cui, Lili
2023-09-19 15:25 ` [PATCH 7/8] Support APX NF Cui, Lili
2023-09-25  6:07   ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-28 12:42   ` Jan Beulich
2023-11-02 10:15     ` Cui, Lili
2023-11-02 10:23       ` Jan Beulich
2023-11-02 10:46         ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-12  2:59           ` H.J. Lu
2023-09-19 15:25 ` [PATCH 8/8] Support APX JMPABS Cui, Lili
2023-09-28 13:11   ` Jan Beulich
2023-11-02  2:32     ` Hu, Lin1

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=SJ0PR11MB5600510F072A41597C3E26FD9EDEA@SJ0PR11MB5600.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=lili.cui@intel.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    --cc=hongjiu.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=lingling.kong@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).