Hello from Gregg C Levine Wait a second gang.... Which version of GCC, and GAS, and the other utilities are we talking about? The latest version of the Binary Utilities for the Unix/Linux families supports, for example Intel instructions, and formats, so it stands to reason that it would do that for the S/390 family. For GCC, we are up to version 3.0.4, I think. For the Binary Utilities, it is up to 2.12 I believe. The last time I attempted to work directly with the source code with that set, the read me files, told me, that it would do things, exactly as stated. Paul, and Christopher can the both of you get back to me, on the versions of your respective items? And while we are at it, the distributions that are involved. Thomas D. I agree with your points. ------------------- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."� Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )
> -----Original Message----- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Thomas David Rivers > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:41 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: FW: Addressing problems using asm embedded in C > > "Condit, Christopher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Thanks for the info Paul, but unfortunately I didn't specify my question > > adequately. I'm writing *IBM* assembler, where a move is spelled MVC. My > > third-hand doc says to write IBM opcodes but use Unix syntax. Whatever that > > means. Here's a simplified example that would get 2 errors, for 2 label > > references: > > > > __asm__ __volatile__( > > " CHI %3,20\n" > > " BH LABEL1\n" > > " LA 2,1\n" > > " B LABEL2 > > "LABEL1 LA 2,0\n" > > "LABEL2 BR 14\n" > > : "=a" (retValue) > > : "d" (pProc), "d" (pStack), "d" (cbStack) > > ); > > I think you're missing a \n on that B LABEL2 - and a closing quote. > That would cause the definition of "LABEL1" to `go missing', which > might explain things... > > Also - you might want to look at Systems/C (http://www.dignus.com), > we think it allows direct in-line assembler in C in a much > nicer fashion than GCC does. But - that's a biased opinion. > > Systems/C generates either HLASM or GAS output - supporting > both traditional mainframe operating systems and mainframe linux. > > With Systems/C - you would have: > ... > { > __register(2) int r; /* retval is in R2 */ > __register(3) int t; /* testval is in R3 */ > t = /* some expression - set's testval in R3 */ > __asm { > CHI 3,20 > BH LABEL1 > LA 2,1 > B LABEL2 > LABEL1 LA 2,0 > LABEL2 BR 14 > } > retval = r; /* Grab R2 and place it in `retval' */ > } > > > > > > I have already displayed that certain simple register manipulation works in > > context, so I am confident that this language works, and that I am on the > > right track. > > > > On the other hand, it's news to me that AT&T/Unix assembler can work on an > > IBM S/390 box. > > Oh yeah - it's just the GNU gas assembler... generating ELF > format... at some point, bits are bits... > > > I was only brought in on this project cuz I know IBM > > assembler. If Unix assembler can be used just as well, maybe I will try to > > dump this thing back on our Unix guy... > > Well - it's UNIX assembler syntax - but IBM instructions. I'm sure > you're input will be very much appreciated... > > - Dave Rivers - > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: (919) 676-0847 > Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com > > > > > CXC > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul L. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 11:59 AM > > To: Condit, Christopher > > Subject: Re: Addressing problems using asm embedded in C > > > > > > It's been many years since I did any assembly programing, but I seem > > to recall that different assemblers would use a different syntax to > > denote if the address or the contents of the address should be used. > > > > Any chance that this explanation would apply? > > > > From: http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~parent/classes/360/faq.html > > > > Relocation Truncated to Fit > > > > The problem is that if you have declared a label, say something like: > > > > X: .word 20 > > > > Then in your code, suppose you say something like: > > > > mov X, %r3 > > > > What you are trying to do is to copy the value in the word corresponding > > to X into %r3; except the right way to do it is first get the address of X > > into another register etc. > > > > The reason why the assembler assembles this without complaint is thatthe > > (unrelocated) address of X is typically small enough to fit in 13 bits > > available in the mov instruction; so it assembles using that address. Then > > the loader relocates the stuff and now the relocated address won't fit in > > the 13 bits, so it `truncates the relocation to fit'. > > > > Paul > > > > On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Condit, Christopher wrote: > > > > > Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 14:13:17 -0400 > > > From: "Condit, Christopher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Reply-To: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Addressing problems using asm embedded in C > > > > > > I'm trying to write some assembler embedded in C via __asm__ > > __volatile__(). > > > A couple hundred lines or so. Compiler doesn't complain, but linker > > gives > > > "relocation truncated to fit" errors on any instruction that refers to a > > > label (B's and EX's). I know that message usually (in C) means you are > > > calling an unknown function or else are branching too far. Neither of > > these > > > conditions is the case, since I am only branching down a few bytes, and > > I'm > > > not calling any functions by name. Total dll length is under 32K. > > > > > > Fooling around, I note that by recoding to avoid using any labels (lots of > > > relative branching), I can eliminate the link time errors. So my linker > > is > > > choking basically on all labels. Anybody know what's up, or what I can do > > > about it? Writing labelless code is not an appealing prospect. > > > > > > TIA, > > > Christopher > > > > > > > > > Paul L. Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Are you prepared for NetDay? http://www.netday.org/ > > Linux: It works for me. http://www.linuxdoc.org/ > >
