linux-2.1.92-2 for i386: Are the assembly suffixes really OK?

Horst von Brand (vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl)
Tue, 31 Mar 1998 22:27:18 -0400

There are lots of lines like the following in the patch(this if from the
patch to arch/i386/kernel/head.S):

- mov %dx,%ds; \
- mov %dx,%es;
+ movl %dx,%ds; \
+ movl %dx,%es;

While the patch to arch/i386/kernel/traps.c reads in part:

#define get_seg_byte(seg,addr) ({ \
register unsigned char __res; \
-__asm__("push %%fs;mov %%ax,%%fs;movb %%fs:%2,%%al;pop %%fs" \
+__asm__("pushl %%fs;movl %%ax,%%fs;movb %%fs:%2,%%al;popl %%fs" \
:"=a" (__res):"0" (seg),"m" (*(addr))); \
__res;})

I might be totally off base here, but shouldn't all (most?) of these be
"movw", not "movl" (16 bit moves, not 32 bit ones)?

There are lots and lots of changes like this...

-- 
Horst von Brand                             vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl
Casilla 9G, Viņa del Mar, Chile                               +56 32 672616


 


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu