Re: [PATCH] x86/Intel: accept mandated operand order for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich at suse dot com>]

>>> On 23.04.15 at 14:39, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:16 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>> As pointed out before, the documentation mandates the rounding mode to
>> follow the GPR, so gas should accept such input. As the brojen code got
>> released already we sadly will need to continue to also accept the
>> badly ordered operands.
>>
>> gas/testsuite/
>> 2015-04-16  Jan Beulich  <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>
>>         * gas/i386/avx512f-intel.d: Adjust expectations on operand order.
>>         * gas/i386/evex-lig256-intel.d: Likewise.
>>         * gas/i386/evex-lig512-intel.d: Likewise.
>>         * gas/i386/x86-64-avx512f-intel.d: Likewise.
>>         * gas/i386/x86-64-evex-lig256-intel.d: Likewise.
>>         * gas/i386/x86-64-evex-lig512-intel.d: Likewise.
>>
>> opcodes/
>> 2015-04-16  Jan Beulich  <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>
>>         * i386-opc.tbl: New IntelSyntax entries for vcvt{,u}si2s{d,s}.
>>         * i386-tbl.h: Regenerate.
>>
> 
> I checked with our people.   Intel Software Developer Manual only governs
> the output side of the binary form of instruction byte stream matches what
> HW expect. Each assembly tool product has its own implementation of
> transforming the input language/dialect into the output stream.  In case of
> GNU assembler, operand order for AT&T and Intel syntax for AVX512 is
> the one used in AVX512 testcases.

I don't mind AT&T being broken here (and elsewhere when it
comes to multiple source operands, as pointed out before), but
I do care about Intel syntax being in line with what the Intel
SDM says (and what I assume MASM is [going to] use). So
unless you're trying to tell me that the SDM is going to be
changed, or you have proof that MASM also deviates from what
the current documentation mandates ...

> It is not OK.

... I guess as the Intel syntax maintainer I could decide to ignore
this.

Jan