Re: assemble code and disassembled code in-consistency

2012-07-06 Thread H.J. Lu
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Feng LI wrote: > So under x86_64 machine, I could do a > Shl %rax 32 safely without being truncated? Yes. > Still , why the suffix q is removed in the disassembled code if they are the > same? > You can get suffix by adding -Msuffix to objdump. -- H.J.

Re: assemble code and disassembled code in-consistency

2012-07-06 Thread H.J. Lu
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Feng LI wrote: > Hi folks, > > I have a backend hook (x86_64) for builtin function expansion, so > I have this: > > expand_simple_binop (DImode, ASHIFT, op0, > GEN_INT (32),op0,1,OPTAB_DIRECT); > > to generate op0 = op0<<32 (op0 is th

Re: assemble code and disassembled code in-consistency

2012-07-06 Thread H.J. Lu
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Feng LI wrote: > Hi folks, > > I have a backend hook (x86_64) for builtin function expansion, so > I have this: > > expand_simple_binop (DImode, ASHIFT, op0, > GEN_INT (32),op0,1,OPTAB_DIRECT); > > to generate op0 = op0<<32 (op0 is th

assemble code and disassembled code in-consistency

2012-07-06 Thread Feng LI
Hi folks, I have a backend hook (x86_64) for builtin function expansion, so I have this: expand_simple_binop (DImode, ASHIFT, op0, GEN_INT (32),op0,1,OPTAB_DIRECT); to generate op0 = op0<<32 (op0 is the first argument of this builtin function, with type SIZE_T) T