[LLVMdev] [PATCH] x86: disambiguate unqualified btr, bts

Jim Grosbach grosbach at apple.com
Wed Jul 10 13:53:04 PDT 2013

On Jul 10, 2013, at 1:44 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon at gmail.com> wrote:

> Jim Grosbach wrote:
>> Also, please elaborate on why this is a good change. Because gas accepts it
>> isn’t sufficient reason in and of itself.
> That they're valid instructions isn't sufficient reason?  Should I
> additionally say that linux.git uses them?

Is the diagnostic incorrect?

To say that another way, is the assembler correctly diagnosing a previously unnoticed problem in the project source code, or is the assembler not behaving correctly according the the documented Intel assembly mnemonics? If the former, the fix belongs in the project, not the assembler. If the latter, then we should absolutely fix the assembler. From your emails, it is unclear to me which is the case.


> I wrote:
>> The instructions btr and bts are perfectly valid, and have existed since
>> Intel 386.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130710/4f50d063/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list