Re: [PATCH] gas/x86-64: properly distinguish low and high register ranges

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 30.07.12 at 18:04, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 24.07.12 at 16:16, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Can you add some testcases?
>>>
>>> I knew you would ask this, but sorry, this makes no sense - if test
>>> cases would are desirable here, they shouldn't be testing just the
>>> things that this patch fixes, but also any other invalid operand
>>> combinations. As an example - why would testing that "xlat [r11]"
>>> isn't accepted be needed, but not e.g. "xlat [ecx]"?
>>>
>>> Furthermore, this fixes actually broken behavior, so accepting
>>> the change shouldn't be dependent upon test case availability.
>>
>> What broken behavior does this change fix?
>
> I gave an example above - xlat [r11]. Other similar examples
> involve other string instructions requiring fixed registers as
> well as the one or two instructions requiring xmm0/ymm0 as
> their first/last operand.
>

Please open a bug report for broken behaviors.

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.