RE: [PATCH v2] x86: modernize sync_bitops.h

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 21.11.18 at 12:55, <David.Laight@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Jan Beulich
>> Sent: 21 November 2018 10:11
>> 
>> Add missing insn suffixes and use rmwcc.h just like was (more or less)
>> recently done for bitops.h as well.
> 
> Why? bts (etc) on memory don't really have an 'operand size'.

Of course they do - depending on operand size they operate on
2-, 4-, or 8-byte quantities. When the second operand is a
register, the suffix is redundant (but doesn't hurt), but when
the second operand is an immediate, the assembler (in AT&T
syntax) has no way of knowing what operand size you mean.

Jan