From: "Tim Prince" <tprince@computer.org>
To: "Graham Stott" <grahams@redhat.com>, <mcuss@cdlsystems.com>
Cc: <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Assembly in Gcc
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 19:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <000101c17d38$fe510e10$c4eb85ce@amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C0D3A05.6FE3602F@redhat.com>
Much as I dislike the MSVC style, this would be a valuable contribution.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Stott" <grahams@redhat.com>
To: <mcuss@cdlsystems.com>
Cc: <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 1:03 PM
Subject: Re: Assembly in Gcc
> Mark,
>
> Mark Cuss wrote:
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I am new to doing inline asembly in gcc and have a few questions -
hopefully
> > someone can help me out.
> >
> > I read the section of the manual on the doing inline assembly. It is
quite
> > different than the old Borland compiler I used to use on DOS - I could
just
> > put an "asm " and enclose all of my Intel syntax assmebly instructions
> > inside there. Is there any way to do this in gcc? I found the
intel_syntax
> > directive and passed that in, but it seems that I still need to put %' s
in
> > front of register names, etc.
> >
> You might like to try ".intel_syntax noprefix" that avoids the needs to
the %
> on register names.
>
> > The project I am working on involves integrating a large chunk (~ 40
pages)
> > of Intel assembly instructions into a program which I must compile with
gcc.
> > So, my goal is to be able to do something like this:
> >
> > asm {
> > mov dx, 378
> > mov al, FF
> > out dx, al
> > } ;
> >
> > ... Without reformatting the code. Is this possible?
> >
> Not as things currently stand you have to convert the asm { ... } form
into
> GCC's own asm construct.
>
> Now it just so happens that I'm working on adding support of MS style
inline
> assembler in to GCC for the x86. It's in an advanced state and almost
ready
> to be submitted.
>
> > Thanks in advance
> >
>
> > Mark
>
> Graham
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-05 3:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-03 19:13 gcc-ss-20011203 is now available gccadmin
2001-12-04 7:11 ` Andreas Schwab
2001-12-04 7:59 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-12-04 12:16 ` guerby
2001-12-04 12:24 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-12-04 12:30 ` Phil Edwards
2001-12-04 12:36 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-12-04 12:46 ` Phil Edwards
2001-12-04 12:50 ` Assembly in Gcc Mark Cuss
2001-12-04 13:03 ` Graham Stott
2001-12-04 13:27 ` Mark Cuss
2001-12-04 19:00 ` Tim Prince [this message]
2001-12-11 11:14 ` Embedded Assembly and MMX in GCC Mark Cuss
2001-12-11 12:35 ` Alexandre Oliva
2001-12-11 13:00 ` Mark Cuss
2001-12-11 13:18 ` Alexandre Oliva
2001-12-11 14:09 ` Mark Cuss
2001-12-12 3:48 ` Andreas Schwab
2001-12-11 14:38 ` Craig Rodrigues
2001-12-04 19:54 ` gcc-ss-20011203 is now available Mark Mitchell
2001-12-04 20:05 Assembly in Gcc mike stump
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='000101c17d38$fe510e10$c4eb85ce@amr.corp.intel.com' \
--to=tprince@computer.org \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=grahams@redhat.com \
--cc=mcuss@cdlsystems.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).