lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 13/17] Immediate Values - x86 Optimization
* H. Peter Anvin (hpa@zytor.com) wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> * H. Peter Anvin (hpa@zytor.com) wrote:
>>> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>>> Ok, so the most flexible solution that I see, that should fit for both
>>>> x86 and x86_64 would be :
>>>> 1 byte : "=q" : "a", "b", "c", or "d" register for the i386. For
>>>> x86-64 it is equivalent to "r" class (for 8-bit
>>>> instructions that do not use upper halves).
>>>> 2, 4, 8 bytes : "=r" : A register operand is allowed provided that it is
>>>> in a
>>>> general register.
>>> Any reason to keep carrying this completely misleading comment chunk
>>> still?
>>>
>>> -hpa
>> This comment explains why I use the =q constraint for the 1 bytes
>> immediate value. It makes sure we use an instruction with 1-byte opcode,
>> without REX.R prefix, on x86_64.
>
> No, it doesn't. That would be "=Q".
>
> -hpa

Ok. Sorry, it's been a few months since we looked at this. So the =q
opcode lets the compiler choose instructions with or without REX prefix.
We can allow this because

- We don't need the opcode length in the stop_machine_run() version
- we support variable length opcode in the nmi-safe version

Am I remembering correctly now ?

Mathieu

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-10 02:45    [W:0.048 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site