ami_stuff wrote: > > > Dnia 13 lipca 2009 16:35 Andrew Haley <aph@xxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a): > >> ami_stuff wrote: >>>>> Ok, so it is a GCC's bug? >>>> It's perhaps an optimization that gcc doesn't do. But then >>>> there is an infinite number of optimizations that gcc doesn't do. >>> How should I modify GCC's inline to repleace MULH function (to make it compatible)? >> What for? I posted sample code that should work. > > Could you tell me what I do wrong? Not until you tell me about the results from the code I posted! :-) > > #include <stdio.h> > #include <stdint.h> > > #define MULH_ORG(a,b) (((int64_t)(a) * (int64_t)(b))>>32) > > #define MULH_ASM(xh, xl, a, b) This won't work because xh and xl are outputs. Andrew.
