gh-148285: Allow recording uops after specializing uops

[adityakrmishra]

• FixesAllow recording uops after specializing uops #148285

The Issue:
Currently, analyzer.py uses a strict positional first = True check when validating macro structures. This strictly forces any uop with records_value == True to be at index 0, which prevents Tier 2 recording uops from safely trailing Tier 1 specializing uops.

The Fix:
Replaced the boolean first check with a state tracker (valid_recording_pos) in add_macro().

• valid_recording_pos starts as True.
• It remains True if the parsed part is a specializing uop (uop.properties.tier == 1).
• It ignores CacheEffect and flush parts.
• It flips to False for any other instruction, properly closing the gate.

This safely allows structures like:
macro(X) = _SPECIALIZE_X + _RECORD_TOS_TYPE + unused/1 + _X;

• Issue: Allow recording uops after specializing uops #148285

[python-cla-bot]

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.

[bedevere-app]

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Add one using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

If this change has little impact on Python users, wait for a maintainer to apply the skip news label instead.

[bedevere-app]

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Add one using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

If this change has little impact on Python users, wait for a maintainer to apply the skip news label instead.

[Sacul0457]

Hmm, while this does allow _RECORD uops to come after _SPECIALIZE uops, it also:

• Allows _RECORD uops to come after non _SPECIALIZE uops since not all tier-1 uops are specializing.
• No longer ensures both recording and specializing uops comes first

Example that violates both:

macro(LOAD_SUPER_ATTR) =_LOAD_SUPER_ATTR+// tier1 uop_RECORD_TOS_TYPE+_SPECIALIZE_LOAD_SUPER_ATTR+_PUSH_NULL_CONDITIONAL;

BUT, you should wait for a core dev to review this as I may have misunderstood something.

[bedevere-app]

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Add one using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

If this change has little impact on Python users, wait for a maintainer to apply the skip news label instead.

[adityakrmishra]

@Sacul0457 Good catch! You are entirely correct—my previous logic conflated all tier1 uops with specializing uops, which was too permissive. I also tangled up the Git history on this branch, so I have closed this PR and opened a clean one with a much stricter positional index check that specifically guards for SPECIALIZE prefixes.

The new PR is here: #148373
Thanks for the review