From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zyunone@163.com (=?utf-8?B?5byg5LqR?=) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:22:10 +0800 (GMT+08:00) Subject: =?utf-8?Q?=E5=9B=9E=E5=A4=8D=EF=BC=9ARe:_What_does_%P1_mea?= =?utf-8?Q?n_in_gcc_inline_assembly=3F?= In-Reply-To: <20160307025158.GB1158@rmbp> References: <37CB08C4-29C1-4762-9354-F3EDCEC57820@gmail.com> <20160307025158.GB1158@rmbp> Message-ID: <36b2c58d.223a.1534f18ac89.Coremail.zyunone@163.com> To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org List-Id: kernelnewbies.lists.kernelnewbies.org Maybe your compiler version is different from us. Mine is 4.9.2?debian?as same as daveti's. ?? ?????? ?2016?03?07? 10:51?Adam Lee ??: On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 11:37:21AM +0800, ?? wrote: > > On Mar 4, 2016, at 11:59 PM, Dave Tian wrote: > > This ?P? is used to make gcc happy and work. > Without ?P?, this inline would be interpreted as: > leal $-512(%esp), %eax > With ?P?, this inline is the thing we really want: > leal -512(%esp), %eax > > Eventually, my gcc 4.9.2 does not compile with ?P? is missing. I am not > sure if this is still the case for newer gcc (5/6). But you get the point. > > -daveti > > Thank you for your detailed answer ! > > By the way? If someone have the problems alike, I suggest them to write some > inline assembly and check the compiler?s assembly output. Didn't get different outputs here, do you have updates? -- Adam Lee http://adam8157.info _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20160307/49cbade4/attachment.html