From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-42881-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 22647 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2005 20:34:42 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 22606 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Sep 2005 20:34:32 -0000
Received: from az33egw02.freescale.net (HELO az33egw02.freescale.net) (192.88.158.103)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 20:34:32 +0000
Received: from az33smr02.freescale.net (az33smr02.freescale.net [10.64.34.200])
	by az33egw02.freescale.net (8.12.11/az33egw02) with ESMTP id j8KKgJCT025929;
	Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:42:19 -0700 (MST)
Received: from [10.82.17.247] ([10.82.17.247])
	by az33smr02.freescale.net (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j8KKeHU2025011;
	Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:40:17 -0500 (CDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v734)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <930FB6D0-944A-486B-A060-C63D4FC7E141@freescale.com>
Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kumar Gala <kumar.gala@freescale.com>
Subject: common assembly code between ppc32 & ppc64
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 21:03:00 -0000
To: Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00239.txt.bz2

Alan,

I was wondering if there was any GNU asm magic that you where aware  
of to deal with the fact that pointers are different sizes on ppc32  
vs ppc64.  For example:

#ifndef __powerpc64__
#define END_FTR_SECTION(msk, val)               \
99:                                             \
         .section __ftr_fixup,"a";               \
         .align 2;                               \
         .long msk;                              \
         .long val;                              \
         .long 98b;                              \
         .long 99b;                              \
         .previous
#else /* __powerpc64__ */
#define END_FTR_SECTION(msk, val)               \
99:                                             \
         .section __ftr_fixup,"a";               \
         .align 3;                               \
         .llong msk;                             \
         .llong val;                             \
         .llong 98b;                             \
         .llong 99b;                             \
         .previous
#endif /* __powerpc64__ */


Is there any magic to handle ".llong" vs ".long" that we could  
possibly use to reduce the duplication between these two code fragments.

thanks

- kumar