[PATCH v2 02/14] [x86] Add basic support for .code16

[David Woodhouse]

On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 22:51 +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> At the moment, In64BitMode is a toogle between two valid modes.
> Without copying things around in random places (like to the
> fragments), that's somewhat sane. But the more places are dealing with
> feature bits, the more important it becomes to ensure the correctness.
> Does that make sense?

Yeah, but the correctness aspect is simply and succinctly stated as
"Mode16Bit and Mode64Bit are mutually exclusive" — that is, the value
set {1,1} is invalid. 

I don't see the merit in inverting them both just to declare that {0,0}
is invalid instead. Can you show a "likely" coding error or paradigm
which would make that actually useful?

-- 
dwmw2

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5745 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140105/e5e00b28/attachment.bin>