IMUL: fix an additional incorrect sbyte use

One more incorrect use of sbyte in IMUL.

Overall, the IMUL patterns seem really messy.  *Furthermore*, despite
IMUL normally being thought of as signed, the 2- and 3-operand
versions don't produce a high half and are therefore
signedness-agnostic -- we could even add MUL patterns for those forms.

Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
This commit is contained in:
H. Peter Anvin 2009-11-03 09:34:09 -08:00
parent 110e5ecec4
commit b0a6230a80

View File

@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ IMUL reg16,reg16,sbyte16 \320\1\x6B\110\16 186,SM,ND
IMUL reg16,reg16,imm16 \320\1\x69\110\32 186
IMUL reg16,reg16,imm \320\146\x69\110\142 186,SM,ND
IMUL reg32,mem,imm8 \321\1\x6B\110\16 386,SM
IMUL reg32,mem,sbyte64 \321\1\x6B\110\16 386,SM,ND
IMUL reg32,mem,sbyte32 \321\1\x6B\110\16 386,SM,ND
IMUL reg32,mem,imm32 \321\1\x69\110\42 386,SM
IMUL reg32,mem,imm \321\156\x69\110\152 386,SM,ND
IMUL reg32,reg32,imm8 \321\1\x6B\110\16 386