Re: [PATCH 2/8] i386: bitops: Rectify bogus "Ir" constraints

[H. Peter Anvin]

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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/