Doubt on definedBy

[AFOliveira]

Hello!
While trying to achieve the automatically generated .yaml filesm I found something that raised a doubt.

In the following image:

the instruction andn is "defined by: B and Zbb" although Zbb is a part of "B". Isn't this redundant?

The problem I find with this when automatic generating it is that on riscv-opcodes , folder name is zbb and so on my approach, it only shows up zbb. I wanted to hear back from you whether you think it is important to have both, since as of now, only zbb is being parsed on this initial approach.

[dhower-qc]

As we discussed on the side, the current issue is that if we omit B from the above definition, the tool has no way to associate andn with the B extension. This is because the description of the B extension points to Zbb (the 'implies' key), but Zbb doesn't point back to B.

I am going to look at restructuring the schema so that we can determine Zbb is a subset of B. If we have that, we can omit B from definedBy above.