At 16:36 +0000 on 10 Mar (1426001780), Jan Beulich wrote:
> @@ -806,9 +802,9 @@ static int read_ulong(
> static bool_t mul_dbl(unsigned long m[2])
> {
> bool_t rc;
> - asm ( "mul %4; seto %b2"
> - : "=a" (m[0]), "=d" (m[1]), "=q" (rc)
> - : "0" (m[0]), "1" (m[1]), "2" (0) );
> + asm ( "mul %1; seto %b2"
> + : "+a" (m[0]), "+d" (m[1]), "=q" (rc)
> + : "2" (0) );
Would 'bool_t rc = 0' allow you to switch operand 2 to +q and drop the
last input operand as well? Or did that also produce worse code?
Cheers,
Tim.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
