DragonFly BSD
DragonFly bugs List (threaded) for 2004-02
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: bad register name `%sil'

From: YONETANI Tomokazu <qhwt+dragonfly-bugs@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:50:28 +0900


On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 09:41:06PM -0500, David Cuthbert wrote:
> Kip Macy wrote:
> >My first guess would be that that is a binutils issue. In other
> >words, the assembler might not be up to date with the compiler.
> Hm... no, this sounds like a compiler and/or code issue to me.  %sil is
> apparently an AMD-64 register; it doesn't exist on any of the IA-32 or
> variants.
> Related GCC bug:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10153

Is there anyone who knows how that thread in gcc-bugs list came to
a conclusion? At the end of the above log, someone named Richard Henderson
insists that the problem is in the sample code rather than in gcc, and that
using "=q" instead of "=r" solves the problem. It seems to me that that's
gcc team's decision, rather than fixing gcc by disabling the use of these
registers for IA32 platforms, not to mention that the same change has been
applied to atomic.h in FreeBSD-CURRENT months ago.

Well, as my messages or the patch doesn't appear to attract much attention,
I'm not going to add any more words regarding this issue, and wait for the
Team's decision rather than posting silly patches.


[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]