John Breitenbach <breiten@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> In the following inline assembly code, my input parameters need to be
> prefixed with "c" rather than "r".
> I.e. "c0" can be considered an alias for r0, and "c1" for r1, etc. I
> found several instances of inline assembly
> in the linux kernel which punted when it came to this - assuming that
> the function doesn't get inlined, and they
> hard-code c0 and c1 in cases similar to the one below.
>
> I've found current documentation on arm-specific constraints, which
> don't mention coprocessor registers,
> and I tried "c" as below, hoping that it would work. The "mrc"
> instruction syntax requires "c" registers for its
> source operands, although they are actually the regular registers.
>
> Any advice?
>
> unsigned foo( unsigned a, unsigned b)
> {
> int rc;
> __asm__( "mrc p6,0,%0,%1,%2,5": "=r"(rc): "c"(a),"c"(b));
> return( rc);
> }
>
> if not inlined, this needs to assemble as "mrc p6,0,r0,c0,c1,5", but I
> really don't want to hard-code c0 and c1"
The "c" constraint means the condition code register. That's not what
you want.
You seem to want to ask gcc to allocate a and b to coprocessor
registers. That doesn't make much sense. gcc doesn't know anything
about the coprocessor registers and it won't allocate values to them.
If you use an "r" constraint, then gcc will arrange for a and b to be
loaded into some general register. If these really are the same as the
coprocessor registers in your mrc instruction--if storing, e.g., a into
r8 means that mrc will access it as cr8--then just write
__asm__( "mrc p6,0,%0,c%1,c%2,5": "=r"(rc): "r"(a), "r"(b));
This will produce cr8, which I think is what gas expects.
Otherwise, I don't know what you want to do.
Ian
