Re: RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly
Project / Subsystem
binutils / rfc
Date
2026-05-05
Proposer
Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
Source type
public_inbox
Consensus
Proposed
Sentiment
—/10
Technical tradeoffs
- • Need to handle multiple comments for a single instruction.
- • Comments need to be displayed according to the chosen assembly syntax (AT&T vs Intel).
- • Requires expertise in x86 disassembly.
All attributes
- project
- binutils
- subsystem
- rfc
- patch_id
- —
- discussion_id
- 87fr4njrlb.fsf@redhat.com
- source_type
- public_inbox
- title
- Re: RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly
- headline
- RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly
- tldr
- Maintainer Nick Clifton is unsure how to handle multiple comments in x86 disassembly and suggests an x86 maintainer take over.
- proposer
- Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
- consensus
- Proposed
- outcome
- proposed
- sentiment_score
- —
- technical_tradeoffs
-
- • Need to handle multiple comments for a single instruction.
- • Comments need to be displayed according to the chosen assembly syntax (AT&T vs Intel).
- • Requires expertise in x86 disassembly.
- series_id
- —
- series_role
- standalone
- series_parts
- []
- tags
-
- • binutils
- • disassembly
- • x86
- • comments
- • immediate values
- bugzilla_url
- —
- date
- 2026-05-05T00:00:00.000Z
Re: RFC: Annotate immediates in x86 disassembly
This is a follow-up to a previous RFC about annotating immediates in x86 disassembly. The discussion raises the issue of how to handle multiple comments, specifically when both a RIP-relative operand and an immediate value need annotations. Nick Clifton, the current maintainer, admits a lack of x86 expertise and suggests that a dedicated x86 maintainer might be better suited to take over the work.