From 5de4d9ef71d5233026d8e9fbd74ec87cca4d220a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jan Beulich Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:58:42 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] x86/Intel: improve diagnostics The diagnostics issued by check_*_reg() are pretty AT&T-centric. Re-use logic already used for SIMD memory operand size checking also for ones where GPRs would alternatively also be allowed. (There's certainly room for further improvement here.) --- gas/ChangeLog | 6 ++++++ gas/config/tc-i386.c | 9 +++++---- 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/gas/ChangeLog b/gas/ChangeLog index 6eb7f4f94a0..11b20f78731 100644 --- a/gas/ChangeLog +++ b/gas/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +2020-02-12 Jan Beulich + + * config/tc-i386.c (operand_type_register_match): Also fall + through initial two if()-s when the template allows for a GPR + operand. Adjust comment. + 2020-02-11 Jan Beulich (struct _i386_insn): New field "short_form". diff --git a/gas/config/tc-i386.c b/gas/config/tc-i386.c index fec132ab760..1cb5a27ebf2 100644 --- a/gas/config/tc-i386.c +++ b/gas/config/tc-i386.c @@ -2248,8 +2248,7 @@ mismatch: /* If given types g0 and g1 are registers they must be of the same type unless the expected operand type register overlap is null. - Memory operand size of certain SIMD instructions is also being checked - here. */ + Some Intel syntax memory operand size checking also happens here. */ static INLINE int operand_type_register_match (i386_operand_type g0, @@ -2261,14 +2260,16 @@ operand_type_register_match (i386_operand_type g0, && g0.bitfield.class != RegSIMD && (!operand_type_check (g0, anymem) || g0.bitfield.unspecified - || t0.bitfield.class != RegSIMD)) + || (t0.bitfield.class != Reg + && t0.bitfield.class != RegSIMD))) return 1; if (g1.bitfield.class != Reg && g1.bitfield.class != RegSIMD && (!operand_type_check (g1, anymem) || g1.bitfield.unspecified - || t1.bitfield.class != RegSIMD)) + || (t1.bitfield.class != Reg + && t1.bitfield.class != RegSIMD))) return 1; if (g0.bitfield.byte == g1.bitfield.byte -- 2.39.5