Currently, our diagnostics for assembly operands are not consistent.
Some start with (for example) "immediate operand must be ...",
and some with "operand must be an immediate ...". I think the latter
form is preferable for a few reasons:
* It's unambiguous that it is referring to the expected type of operand, not
the type the user provided. For example, the user could provide an register
operand, and get a message taking about an operand is if it is already an
immediate, just not in the accepted range.
* It allows us to have a consistent style once we add diagnostics for operands
that could take two forms, for example a label or pc-relative memory operand.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36689
llvm-svn: 314887
- we are now using immediate AsmOperands so that the range check functions are
tablegen'ed.
- Big bonus is that error messages become much more accurate, i.e. instead of a
useless "invalid operand" error message it will not say that the immediate
operand must in range [x,y], which is why regression tests needed updating.
More tablegen operand descriptions could probably benefit from using
immediateAsmOperand, but this is a first good step to get rid of most of the
nearly identical range check functions. I will address the remaining immediate
operands in next clean ups.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31333
llvm-svn: 299358
The UDF instruction is a reserved undefined instruction space. The assembler
mnemonic was introduced with ARM ARM rev C.a. The instruction is not predicated
and the immediate constant is ignored by the CPU. Add support for the three
encodings for this instruction.
The changes to the invalid instruction test is due to the fact that the invalid
instructions actually overlap with the undefined instruction. Introduction of
the new instruction results in a partial decode as an undefined sequence. Drop
the tests as they are invalid instruction patterns anyways.
llvm-svn: 208751
Oliver Stannard