The 'mod' and 'div' operators in eBPF are unsigned, with no signed
counterpart. xBPF adds two new ALU operations, sdiv and smod, for
signed division and modulus, respectively. Update bpf.md with
'define_insn' blocks for signed div and mod to use them when targetting
xBPF,
Hi Segher!
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 10:15:30AM -0700, David Faust via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> The 'mod' and 'div' operators in eBPF are unsigned, with no signed
>> counterpart. xBPF adds two new ALU operations, sdiv and smod, for
>> signed division and modulus, respectively. Update bpf.md with
>>
Hi!
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 10:15:30AM -0700, David Faust via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The 'mod' and 'div' operators in eBPF are unsigned, with no signed
> counterpart. xBPF adds two new ALU operations, sdiv and smod, for
> signed division and modulus, respectively. Update bpf.md with
> 'define_insn'
>
>>> The 'mod' and 'div' operators in eBPF are unsigned, with no signed
>>> counterpart. xBPF adds two new ALU operations, sdiv and smod, for
>>> signed division and modulus, respectively. Update bpf.md with
>>> 'define_insn' blocks for signed div and mod to use them when targetting
>>> xBPF, and
>> The 'mod' and 'div' operators in eBPF are unsigned, with no signed
>> counterpart. xBPF adds two new ALU operations, sdiv and smod, for
>> signed division and modulus, respectively. Update bpf.md with
>> 'define_insn' blocks for signed div and mod to use them when targetting
>> xBPF, and add n
On 9/17/20 11:15 AM, David Faust via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The 'mod' and 'div' operators in eBPF are unsigned, with no signed
> counterpart. xBPF adds two new ALU operations, sdiv and smod, for
> signed division and modulus, respectively. Update bpf.md with
> 'define_insn' blocks for signed div and