lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRE: bootsect.S changes
On Tue, 19 Oct 1999, Alan Modra wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
> > [SNIPPED]
> >
> > > > opcodes, were fine' -- that was the sole plan at the moment: to have a 2.4
> > > > kernel that doesn't need as86/ld86 to build.
> > >
> >
> > I can't imagine why. That's like deciding to rewrite the kernel so it
> > doesn't require GCC to build. AS86 was just a TOOL! We try to use the
> > appropriate tool for various purposes when the need arises. The
> > appropriate tool to assemble Intel mnemonics is one that understands
> > Intel. GAS does not. GAS doesn't even know the way Intel assembly
> > should be written, i.e., destination operand first.
>
> You're behind the times :-) On a new gas, try
>
> .intel_syntax
>
> and
>
> .att_syntax
>

Wow! I will try it. Is it too much to ask that it be implemented
correctly?

Wonder how it will handle
mov al, byte ptr [foo]
mov ax, word ptr [foo]
mov eax, dword ptr [foo]
fsub qword ptr [foo]
lidt fword ptr [foo]


I gotta check it out............


If this stuff works, then there was no reason to change the boot code
to AT&T syntax. Just do, as you say, '.intel_syntax' and assemble.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
**** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED ****
Penguin : Linux version 2.3.13 on an i686 machine (400.59 BogoMips).
Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.045 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site