RE: [PATCH] x86: prune redundant x64 from RMPREAD
Project / Subsystem
binutils / x86
Date
2026-09-05
Proposer
"Shenoy, Rohan Radhesh" <RohanRadhesh.Shenoy@amd.com>
Source type
public_inbox
Consensus
Proposed
Sentiment
—/10
Technical tradeoffs
- • Explicit vs. implicit operand specification for RMPREAD.
All attributes
- project
- binutils
- subsystem
- x86
- patch_id
- —
- discussion_id
- PH0PR12MB81496A17107CB187927F2796EEB42@PH0PR12MB8149.namprd12.prod.outlook.com
- source_type
- public_inbox
- title
- RE: [PATCH] x86: prune redundant x64 from RMPREAD
- headline
- x86: prune redundant x64 from RMPREAD
- tldr
- Rohan Shenoy questions the need for explicit operands in RMPREAD, suggesting an operand-less form is implied by AMD's APM.
- proposer
- "Shenoy, Rohan Radhesh" <RohanRadhesh.Shenoy@amd.com>
- consensus
- Proposed
- outcome
- proposed
- sentiment_score
- —
- technical_tradeoffs
-
- • Explicit vs. implicit operand specification for RMPREAD.
- series_id
- —
- series_role
- standalone
- series_parts
- []
- tags
-
- • x86
- • assembly
- • instruction syntax
- • amd
- bugzilla_url
- —
- date
- 2026-09-05T00:00:00.000Z
RE: [PATCH] x86: prune redundant x64 from RMPREAD
Rohan Shenoy questions why RMPREAD, unlike other RMP instructions, requires explicit operands. He believes an operand-less form is implied by the latest AMD APM, which suggests implicit use of RAX and RCX registers for RMPREAD.