From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88959 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2015 00:28:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 88942 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jun 2015 00:28:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-ie0-f177.google.com Received: from mail-ie0-f177.google.com (HELO mail-ie0-f177.google.com) (209.85.223.177) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:28:37 +0000 Received: by ieclw1 with SMTP id lw1so24274804iec.3 for ; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 17:28:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.109.138 with SMTP id hs10mr2117820igb.48.1433896115787; Tue, 09 Jun 2015 17:28:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.108.21 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Jun 2015 17:28:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150609192607.GA1408@ibm-tiger.the-meissners.org> References: <20150609180048.GA14132@ibm-tiger.the-meissners.org> <20150609191719.GA22400@gate.crashing.org> <20150609192607.GA1408@ibm-tiger.the-meissners.org> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 02:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR 66474, Document using %x for VSX registers on PowerPC From: David Edelsohn To: Michael Meissner , Segher Boessenkool , GCC Patches , David Edelsohn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00720.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Michael Meissner wrote: > On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 02:17:19PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 02:00:48PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: >> > +asm ("xvadddp %x0,%x1,%x2" "=wa" (v1) : "wa" (v2), "wa" (v3)); >> >> A colon went missing? ^^^ > > Yes, I will correct it when I check it in. Thanks. Mike, VSX registers are a superset of Altivec registers, so the statement about an Altivec register used where a VSX register is expected is a little confusing. How about: Otherwise the register number output in the assembly file will be incorrect if an Altivec register is an operand of a VSX instruction that expects VSX register numbering. Thanks, David