Re: [PATCH] x86: fix AVX-512 16-bit addressing

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

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 21.11.17 at 20:06, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 7:15 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>> --- a/gas/config/tc-i386.c
>>> +++ b/gas/config/tc-i386.c
>>> @@ -4799,11 +4799,9 @@ check_VecOperands (const insn_template *
>>>                 else
>>>                   {
>>>                     /* Vector insn can only have Vec_Disp8/Disp32 in
>>> -                      32/64bit modes, and Vec_Disp8/Disp16 in 16bit
>>> -                      mode.  */
>>> +                      64bit mode, and Vec_Disp8/Disp16/Disp32 in 16/32bit
>>> +                      modes.  */
>>
>> Do we really support 32-bit displacement in 16-bit mode or with 0x67
>> address prefix?
>
> What a strange question: Of course we do, and why would we not?
> Using 32-bit addresses in 16-bit mode is quite useful, and using 16-bit
> addresses in 32-bit mode is at least not illegal. And quite obviously
> there should be no difference between EVEX encoded insns and any
> other ones.
>

We need tests for 32-bit displacement with and without relocations for
.code16 as well as 0x67 prefix.


-- 
H.J.