Re: assembler fix

2014-03-12 Thread Landry Breuil
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:02:15AM -0800, Philip Guenther wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Mark Kettenis mark.kette...@xs4all.nl 
 wrote:
  This adds support for a few more instruction patterns that are
  apparentl needed by gcc 4.8.  Taken from binutils 2.17.  Not sure if
  adding NoRex64 to the existing patterns is really necessary, but it
  shouldn't hurt.
 
 This arose because AMD screwed up and specifed movd instead of
 movq for the mov r/m64 mm opcodes, right?  If we're going to pull
 in the movq changes from binutils 2.17, I think we should pull in the
 matching movd changes (including that wonderful comment).
 
 Looks like even binutils 2.17's disassembler shows this as movd
 instead of movq.  They must have changed that later.  Darn.

What has happened to this diff ? It is required to fix the build of the
upcoming version of webkit, which requires gcc 4.8

Landry



Re: assembler fix

2014-02-17 Thread Philip Guenther
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Mark Kettenis mark.kette...@xs4all.nl wrote:
 This adds support for a few more instruction patterns that are
 apparentl needed by gcc 4.8.  Taken from binutils 2.17.  Not sure if
 adding NoRex64 to the existing patterns is really necessary, but it
 shouldn't hurt.

This arose because AMD screwed up and specifed movd instead of
movq for the mov r/m64 mm opcodes, right?  If we're going to pull
in the movq changes from binutils 2.17, I think we should pull in the
matching movd changes (including that wonderful comment).

Looks like even binutils 2.17's disassembler shows this as movd
instead of movq.  They must have changed that later.  Darn.


Philip Guenther