On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Richard Henderson <r...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 2012-08-03 01:51, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> The same reasoning goes for dynamic negation: for neg %eax,%eax value >> 0x80000000 stays the same, but we have changed (x)sub to an (x)add in >> the code stream. > > So? Did you think the xadd will trap?
No, but can we ignore the fact that we changed xsub -0x80000000, mem to xadd -0x080000000, mem? Uros.
