Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote:
>> * The "I" constraint modifier is applicable only to immediate-value operands,
>> and combining it with "r" is bogus.
>
> This is wrong too.
>
> The whole point of a "Ir" modifier is to say that the instruction takes
> *either* an "I" or an "r".
>
> Andrew - the ones I've looked at were all wrong. Please don't take this
> series.
>
Incidentally, I just noticed the x86-64 bitops have "dIr" as their
constraint set. "d" would normally be redundant with "r", and as far as
I know, gcc doesn't prefer one over the other without having "?" or "!"
as part of the constraint, so is is "d" a stray or is there some meaning
behind it?
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
