https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26685

--- Comment #15 from Jan Beulich <jbeulich at suse dot com> ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #14)
> (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #13)
> > What is needed is some sort of flag to indicate that in this specific case
> > it needs to be foo(%eip).
> 
> No, we don't want 0x67 prefix for RIP-relative addressing for x32.

You did read me writing "in this specific case", didn't you? I understand you
don't want this in the general case. The way your (broken) change was written,
you very much get a 0x67 prefix in this specific case, so I don't understand at
all what you're trying to tell me.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Reply via email to