This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH i386] Introduce __readeflags () and __writeeflags () intrinsics.
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Kirill Yukhin <kirill dot yukhin at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 10:07:36 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH i386] Introduce __readeflags () and __writeeflags () intrinsics.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131204165948 dot GA21551 at msticlxl57 dot ims dot intel dot com> <20131204175858 dot GB21551 at msticlxl57 dot ims dot intel dot com>
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Kirill Yukhin <kirill.yukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> On 04 Dec 19:59, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> So, is it ok for trunk?
>
> Small correction. I think it is better to use
> popfql/pushfql instead of popf/pushf (however they're
> encoded equally).
>
If you define the proper type, you can use pushf/pop
and push/popf in the same readeflags/writeflags
implementation for -m32/-mx32/-m64.
--
H.J.