Re: [PATCH v3 02/13] RISC-V: EEW64 checking

Project / Subsystem

binutils / risc-v

Date

2026-07-21

Proposer

Nelson Chu <nelson.chu1990@gmail.com>

Source type

public_inbox

Consensus

Proposed

Sentiment

/10

Technical tradeoffs

  • Simplifies checks by introducing a new instruction class, potentially improving maintainability.

All attributes

project
binutils
subsystem
risc-v
patch_id
discussion_id
CAHT-pJywaC76VOWGdEFbKVDkTLxcij0fLmJyAN86V+4rPuay=A@mail.gmail.com
source_type
public_inbox
title
Re: [PATCH v3 02/13] RISC-V: EEW64 checking
headline
RISC-V: EEW64 checking
tldr
Discussion on correct handling of RISC-V Zve64x extension checks in assembler and disassembler.
proposer
Nelson Chu <nelson.chu1990@gmail.com>
consensus
Proposed
outcome
proposed
sentiment_score
technical_tradeoffs
  • Simplifies checks by introducing a new instruction class, potentially improving maintainability.
series_id
binutils:risc-v: eew64 checking
series_role
reply
series_parts
[]
tags
  • risc-v
  • extensions
  • binutils
  • assembler
  • disassembler
bugzilla_url
date
2026-07-21T00:00:00.000Z

Re: [PATCH v3 02/13] RISC-V: EEW64 checking

This discussion addresses the correct implementation of checks for the RISC-V Zve64x extension in binutils’ assembler and disassembler. Jan Beulich points out that the disassembler should also use the INSN_V_EEW64 flag and questions the redundancy of Zve32x checks. Nelson Chu agrees with this, suggesting that a new INSN_CLASS_ZVE64X would be a more appropriate way to handle these checks, aligning with the assembler’s logic and simplifying the code.