>>> On 01.07.16 at 18:51, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
> How about a different example, from the second hunk
>
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
> @@ -832,8 +832,19 @@ static int read_ulong(
> static bool_t mul_dbl(unsigned long m[2])
> {
> bool_t rc;
> - asm ( "mul %1; seto %2"
> - : "+a" (m[0]), "+d" (m[1]), "=qm" (rc) );
> +
> + asm ( "mul %1;"
> +#ifndef __GCC_ASM_FLAG_OUTPUTS__
> + "seto %[rc];"
> +#endif
> + : "+a" (m[0]), "+d" (m[1]),
> +#ifdef __GCC_ASM_FLAG_OUTPUTS__
> + [rc] "=@cco" (rc)
> +#else
> + [rc] "=qm" (rc)
> +#endif
> + );
> +
> return rc;
> }
Looking at this again I think I really like the original, submitted version
better. Are you strongly biased towards the above form?
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
