lynx.abraxas@xxxxxxxxxx writes: > On 24/03/07 20:42:02, Andrew Haley wrote: > > Is there then an option to gcc that lets gcc push all registers before asm so > that I can use what I need without having to hope gcc lets me use all > registers? No. > > > But if I specified "b" it complains about: error: PIC register > > > %ebx clobbered in asm > > > > > > Is this a bug in gcc??? Is there a constraint just for ebp so I > > > don't have to use "R" and hope it gets into ebp? > > > > Why do you care that it is in ebp? Why do you not allow gcc to choose > > the register? You seem to want to use explicit registers in your asm, > > but I can't see any reason why you want to do that. gcc usually works > > better when you let gcc choose the registers. > > I tried with just "r". But then gcc complains about not enough > registers as it seems not wanting to use ebp and it still doesn't > want to give up on ebx for PIC. Please, give us a test case. > Another reason is I don't know how to specify a register in the asm > code that is still empty. Like in my problem I need at least one > empty register apart the six preloaded ones. I use ebx there, so I > can circumvent the PIC problem. Is there a way to specify an empty > register without a direct name? Sure, you just need to use an input/ouput register operand. It's in the docs. > And %dx I use because there is no way mentioned in the docs how to > reduce the size when using eg %3. How to reduce the size of what? This doesn't make any sense to me. Please, give us a test case. Andrew.
