https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19660
H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to njholcomb from comment #4)
> Coming back to this, my concern is that outputting instructions with
> prefixes where the prefixes cause the instruction to be undefined is
> misleading. If the output of the decoder is intended to match the
> instruction that will be executed, it should produce an error, because
> that's what will occur when the instruction is executed on a processor.
UD can happen for various reasons. Because an AVX instruction is undefined
on Haswell machine, it doesn't mean objdump should decode it based on where
the program runs.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
