From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sergey.belyashov@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-qk1-x729.google.com (mail-qk1-x729.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::729])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A2DD38618BB
 for <cgen@sourceware.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 13:59:40 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 4A2DD38618BB
Received: by mail-qk1-x729.google.com with SMTP id b14so2097579qkn.4
 for <cgen@sourceware.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 06:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=tplsbINJXMVRXXktTSjsGirvVL91KICChD6s9SPNCLM=;
 b=iBH1bJdnPQGUIzXbU7ieKUHBY/IWQSzrf0Wkhu0Wimv+utLZZU/m9pfj6lcofkztwf
 rZ3Y62xfHQJkr/1pqgXy+MQI9Zg9W+A76vjwrit/LB5sQqFzheTmVYQ8EHWTPoGt4eMt
 SFhh9+PLxmdJkmx2jDKuNXIUa4dasqNZhiozA79bXvs7QPUN9IOvsGnNFc1KywmYL8ZW
 TVsSshRCwgAEpYFwti4pUvJr+MIPGtMCxJNMILGRzowZSAvznkiDb1lQ8naEmu3VVTCD
 ttzj4OLNOwX3iWJC/4VRGbvaKhu03C4k4pL6N6fbJivmHl6+r1lXT06x6M4qoOnufmGt
 Araw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532GNNIObdJBaxNerEv/DuryCTSLLVY0ARJchJIyFWlhDQMBPQNn
 m5WItmC7ztv4E3tS9DWgWSOJjThADsjtw/HI5js=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzZCiBHMM79iYmG6f3DmT5HLhxQOULnc7OB36kXvvRSi/jdLBtWThk3kY6eYY9PH3WZPHLlw8jB8G2SF6qGwFE=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:c15:: with SMTP id 21mr5841239qkm.405.1597240779821;
 Wed, 12 Aug 2020 06:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOe0RDzfi4+f2QL-EN83LgLowFG2DQpmajf-gK-rL5ys+Y52NQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200427162914.GA21677@redhat.com>
 <CAOe0RDx2ppy3fqVTyWpEaVpXK-PvKeJNMEc4tKtPhqtKcmdUCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <87pnbsztze.fsf@gnu.org>
 <CAOe0RDz3E99N8=5L7zW4srgMMAecWbFrfiqKQvEY63fuvXocGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <87lfmgzoic.fsf@gnu.org>
 <CAOe0RDywVAHVfwZhAwvJhdSYHf5nmbXwsWpZVLf90xxY3tgUKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOe0RDxwHg4GZigSOm1c9xWafriO=WEAh=U6T3QhR4uLbgBfrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200811153823.GA20457@redhat.com>
 <CAOe0RDw6QWgRBRpiJ1Yr7scXrVPi-0z-DAFT8s8a+9RABh+S-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200811160847.GB20457@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200811160847.GB20457@redhat.com>
From: Sergey Belyashov <sergey.belyashov@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 16:59:28 +0300
Message-ID: <CAOe0RDzd0UZ30fvzf9jK-GQE6WkyLRaDOqOyfGrGbP8UkAv8rg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: non-fixed-length ISAs are unsupported for now
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
Cc: Sergey Belyashov via Cgen <cgen@sourceware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 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=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: cgen@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Cgen mailing list <cgen.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/cgen>,
 <mailto:cgen-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/cgen/>
List-Post: <mailto:cgen@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cgen-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/cgen>,
 <mailto:cgen-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 13:59:41 -0000

Hi,

> Does it work if you comment out all other instructions?  If yes, then
> I'd approach it with a bisection-like procedure to identify the real
> source of conflict.

I have tried it. Result is the same: ifields are just added (part of
generated z80-opc.c):

/* The instruction table.  */

static const CGEN_OPCODE z80_cgen_insn_opcode_table[MAX_INSNS] =
{
  /* Special null first entry.
     A `num' value of zero is thus invalid.
     Also, the special `invalid' insn resides here.  */
  { { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, {{0}}, 0, {0}},
/* retn */
  {
    { 0, 0, 0, 0 },
    { { MNEM, 0 } },
    & ifmt_retn, { 0x132 } //must be 0xED, 0x45
  },
/* reti */
  {
    { 0, 0, 0, 0 },
    { { MNEM, 0 } },
    & ifmt_retn, { 0x13a } //must be 0xED, 0x4D
  },
};

Also I have tried to make 0xED00 instead of 0xED and 0x4500 instead of
0x45/0x4D, generated C-code looks more correct but does not
disassemble 0xed 0x45 opcode.

Best regards,
Sergey Belyashov