[Bug gas/29524] x86: move-with-sign-extend inconsistent with move-with-zero-extend
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29524 --- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Jan Beulich : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=a28fedbc3f582ce7c8bad2eb017b1dc072bb1da7 commit a28fedbc3f582ce7c8bad2eb017b1dc072bb1da7 Author: Jan Beulich Date: Mon Dec 12 14:01:02 2022 +0100 x86: further re-work insn/suffix recognition to also cover MOVSX PR gas/29524 Having templates with a suffix explicitly present has always been quirky. After prior adjustment all that's left to also eliminate the anomaly from move-with-sign-extend is to consolidate the insn templates and to make may_need_pass2() cope (plus extend testsuite coverage). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug gas/29524] x86: move-with-sign-extend inconsistent with move-with-zero-extend
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29524 Jan Beulich changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from Jan Beulich --- Now things are in line with MOVZ*, so marking as resolved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug gas/29524] x86: move-with-sign-extend inconsistent with move-with-zero-extend
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29524 --- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Jan Beulich : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=04784e33fabb45c4de7a901587f468d4bc169649 commit 04784e33fabb45c4de7a901587f468d4bc169649 Author: Jan Beulich Date: Mon Dec 12 13:51:46 2022 +0100 x86: re-work insn/suffix recognition Having templates with a suffix explicitly present has always been quirky. Introduce a 2nd matching pass in case the 1st one couldn't find a suitable template _and_ didn't itself already need to trim off a suffix to find a match at all. This requires error reporting adjustments (albeit luckily fewer than I was afraid might be necessary), as errors previously reported during matching now need deferring until after the 2nd pass (because, obviously, we must not emit any error if the 2nd pass succeeds). While also related to PR gas/29524, it was requested that move-with-sign-extend be left as broken as it always was. PR gas/29525 Note that with the dropped CMPSD and MOVSD Intel Syntax string insn templates taking operands, mixed IsString/non-IsString template groups (with memory operands) cannot occur anymore. With that maybe_adjust_templates() becomes unnecessary (and is hence being removed). PR gas/29526 Note further that while the additions to the intel16 testcase aren't really proper Intel syntax, we've been permitting all of those except for the MOVD variant. The test therefore is to avoid re-introducing such an inconsistency. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug gas/29524] x86: move-with-sign-extend inconsistent with move-with-zero-extend
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29524 Jan Beulich changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |--- Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED --- Comment #2 from Jan Beulich --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1) > Since movsX is used as string instructions, this is expected. It may be expected by you, but that's not an objective reason to mark a report as "won't fix". Like just said in 29525, please don't close bug reports lightly as "won't fix". Doing so needs to be based on objective reasons, not personal taste. This includes qualifying some issues as "minor" (and then using just that as a justification). It may be acceptable to not invest time in fixing such, but if a fix is available and isn't entirely unreasonable, it shouldn't be rejected. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug gas/29524] x86: move-with-sign-extend inconsistent with move-with-zero-extend
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29524 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- Since movsX is used as string instructions, this is expected. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
