search for: sllk

...re only available on certain processors. These instructions use context-dependent parsers. Everything works fine for the valid cases, but if you try to use an instruction on processors that don't support it, the asm parser says: /tmp/foo.s:1:2: error: invalid operands for instruction sllk %r2,%r3,1 ^ rather than: /tmp/foo.s:1:2: error: instruction requires: distinct-ops sllk %r2,%r3,1 ^ This is because MatchOperandParserImpl() skips custom parsers if the subtarget feature isn't enabled, so the instruction is parsed using the default operand...

> /tmp/foo.s:1:2: error: instruction requires: distinct-ops > sllk %r2,%r3,1 > ^ That seems like it would be a good improvement for all targets. > ARM seems to rely on the current MatchOperandParserImpl() behaviour, > so I'm not going to suggest changing it unconditionally. Presumably you switched it and looked at what fell over; do you...

Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> writes: >> /tmp/foo.s:1:2: error: instruction requires: distinct-ops >> sllk %r2,%r3,1 >> ^ > > That seems like it would be a good improvement for all targets. Thanks, sounds like it might be more acceptable than I thought :-) >> ARM seems to rely on the current MatchOperandParserImpl() behaviour, >> so I'm not going to suggest chang...

On Jul 17, 2013, at 10:26 AM, Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> writes: >>> /tmp/foo.s:1:2: error: instruction requires: distinct-ops >>> sllk %r2,%r3,1 >>> ^ >> >> That seems like it would be a good improvement for all targets. > > Thanks, sounds like it might be more acceptable than I thought :-) FWIW, I'm the guy to blame for the current implementation and I like the idea. Getting it right ma...