[Bug gas/18559] Added support for better disassembling of VMOV reg,immediate with VFP coprocessor
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18559 --- Comment #3 from Alessandro Marzocchi --- No problem Regards Alessandro 2015-07-16 17:46 GMT+02:00 nickc at redhat dot com < sourceware-bugzi...@sourceware.org>: > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18559 > > Nick Clifton changed: > >What|Removed |Added > > > Status|NEW |RESOLVED > CC||nickc at redhat dot com > Resolution|--- |FIXED > > --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton --- > Hi Alessandro, > > Thanks very much for developing this patch. I have now applied it to the > sources, so we should now be seeing more helpful output from the ARM > disassembler. > > Cheers > Nick > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You reported the bug. > -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/18735] New: multiple definition of `foo'
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18735
Bug ID: 18735
Summary: multiple definition of `foo'
Product: binutils
Version: 2.26 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
[hjl@gnu-6 pr18720]$ cat foo1.c
#if 0
void
foo (void)
{
}
asm (".symver foo,foo@FOO");
#else
void
foo (void)
{
}
asm (".symver foo,foo@@FOO");
#endif
[hjl@gnu-6 pr18720]$ gcc -c foo1.c
[hjl@gnu-6 pr18720]$
/export/build/gnu/binutils-misc/build-x86_64-linux/ld/ld-new -r foo1.o
foo1.o:(*IND*+0x0): multiple definition of `foo'
foo1.o:foo1.c:(.text+0x0): first defined here
[hjl@gnu-6 pr18720]$
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/18736] New: x86 vcvtsi2sd has {er} decorator in wrong place
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18736
Bug ID: 18736
Summary: x86 vcvtsi2sd has {er} decorator in wrong place
Product: binutils
Version: 2.24
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: m at rolle dot name
Target Milestone: ---
The vcvtsi2sd instruction has the {er} decorator associated with the last
operand. See Intel doc:
EVEX.NDS.LIG.F2.0F.W1 2A /r
VCVTSI2SD xmm1, xmm2, r/m64{er}
However, objdump produces, as an example,
5290: 62 61 97 10 2a f0 vcvtsi2sd xmm30,xmm29,{rn-sae},rax
Also, as requires the form
vcvtsi2sd xmm30,xmm29,{rn-sae},rax
and it will not accept the (proper) form
vcvtsi2sd xmm30,xmm29,rax,{rn-sae}# Error: operand type mismatch for
`vcvtsi2sd'
as does not produce incorrect code, but it is a serious problem because it will
not assemble code that follows the Intel spec.
I suspect that in both as and objdump, there is logic that associates the {er}
decorator with the last _vector_ source operand, rather than the last vector or
GPR source. They correctly ignore immediate operands.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/18737] New: Wrong memory operand size for x86 GATHER/SCATTER instructions
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18737
Bug ID: 18737
Summary: Wrong memory operand size for x86 GATHER/SCATTER
instructions
Product: binutils
Version: 2.24
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: gas
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: m at rolle dot name
Target Milestone: ---
gather/scatter instructions require a memory size to match the vector register
size. However, the memory size is actually the element size, according to
Intel doc. as will accept memory operand without a size specifier.
vgatherqps ymm30{k1},DWORD PTR [rcx+zmm31*4+0x400] # Error: operand size
mismatch for `vgatherqps'
vgatherqps ymm30{k1},YMMWORD PTR [rcx+zmm31*4+0x400]
vgatherqps ymm30{k1},[rcx+zmm31*4+0x400]
vscatterqps DWORD PTR [rcx+zmm31*4+0x400]{k1},ymm30 # Error: operand size
mismatch for `vscatterqps'
vscatterqps YMMWORD PTR [rcx+zmm31*4+0x400]{k1},ymm30
vscatterqps [rcx+zmm31*4+0x400]{k1},ymm30
If possible, why don't you accept both the vector size and the element size.
Otherwise, please change the vector size to the element size.
Does not produce incorrect code, but it is serious because it will not assemble
a valid instruction according to the Intel doc.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/18736] x86 vcvtsi2sd has {er} decorator in wrong place
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18736 Michael Rolle changed: What|Removed |Added Component|binutils|gas -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/18736] x86 vcvtsi2sd has {er} decorator in wrong place
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18736 --- Comment #1 from Michael Rolle --- Note the objdump problem should be forwarded to the binutils component. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/18738] New: Wrong memory operand size for x86 GATHER/SCATTER instructions
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18738
Bug ID: 18738
Summary: Wrong memory operand size for x86 GATHER/SCATTER
instructions
Product: binutils
Version: 2.24
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: m at rolle dot name
Target Milestone: ---
objdump disassembles gather/scatter instructions showing the vector operand
size as the memory operand size. However, the Intel doc says it is the element
size.
In these examples:
0: 62 22 7d 41 93 74 b9vgatherqps ymm30{k1},YMMWORD PTR
[rcx+zmm31*4+0x100]
7: 40
8: 62 22 7d 41 a3 74 b9vscatterqps YMMWORD PTR
[rcx+zmm31*4+0x100]{k1},ymm30
f: 40
YMMWORD PTR should be DWORD PTR.
(objdump did get the disp*N compression right, converting a 40h displacement
byte into a 0x100 displacement.)
See also bug 18737 for similar problem with gas assembler.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/18736] x86 vcvtsi2sd has {er} decorator in wrong place
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18736
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Michael Rolle from comment #0)
> The vcvtsi2sd instruction has the {er} decorator associated with the last
> operand. See Intel doc:
>
> EVEX.NDS.LIG.F2.0F.W1 2A /r
> VCVTSI2SD xmm1, xmm2, r/m64{er}
This is a notation in ISA spec, not the assembly manual.
> However, objdump produces, as an example,
>
> 5290: 62 61 97 10 2a f0 vcvtsi2sd xmm30,xmm29,{rn-sae},rax
>
> Also, as requires the form
>
> vcvtsi2sd xmm30,xmm29,{rn-sae},rax
>
This is the form for GNU assembler.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/18737] Wrong memory operand size for x86 GATHER/SCATTER instructions
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18737 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fomin at protonmail dot ch, ||hjl.tools at gmail dot com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/18738] Wrong memory operand size for x86 GATHER/SCATTER instructions
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18738 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fomin at protonmail dot ch, ||hjl.tools at gmail dot com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
