Sign in Join

Live chat for Free Pascal, Lazarus, Delphi and every Pascal programmer.

Mailing lists / fpc-pascal / 2018-01

issue when enabling -O2

12 messages · 2 people · –

Reply by email Subscribe to this list Your subscription

Read-only archive. Use j and k to move between messages.

Matias Vara

Hello everyone,

I am getting an exception when I enable the -O2 optimization. More precisaily, the line that stars with write_portd.... is corrupting the data section. This is the pascal code:

function PciReadDword(const bus, device, func, regnum: UInt32): UInt32;
var
  Send: DWORD;
begin
  Send := $80000000 or (bus shl 16) or (device shl 11) or (func shl 8) or
(regnum shl 2);
  write_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_INDEX);
  read_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_DATA);
  Result := Send;
end;

*which generates (without -02):*

.section
.text.n_arch_$$_pcireaddword$longword$longword$longword$longword$$longword,"x" .balign 16,0x90
.globl ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$LONGWORD ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$LONGWORD: .Lc207:
.seh_proc ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$LONGWORD .Ll464:
# [992] begin
pushq %rbp
.seh_pushreg %rbp
.Lc209:
.Lc210:
movq %rsp,%rbp
.Lc211:
leaq -80(%rsp),%rsp
.seh_stackalloc 80
.seh_endprologue
# Var bus located at rbp-8, size=OS_32
# Var device located at rbp-16, size=OS_32
# Var func located at rbp-24, size=OS_32
# Var regnum located at rbp-32, size=OS_32
# Var $result located at rbp-40, size=OS_32
# Var Send located at rbp-48, size=OS_32
movl %ecx,-8(%rbp)
movl %edx,-16(%rbp)
movl %r8d,-24(%rbp)
movl %r9d,-32(%rbp)
.Ll465:
# [993] Send := $80000000 or (bus shl 16) or (device shl 11) or (func shl
8) or (regnum shl 2);
movl -8(%rbp),%eax
shll $16,%eax
orl $2147483648,%eax
movl -16(%rbp),%edx
shll $11,%edx
orl %eax,%edx
movl -24(%rbp),%eax
shll $8,%eax
orl %edx,%eax
movl -32(%rbp),%edx
shll $2,%edx
orl %eax,%edx
movl %edx,-48(%rbp)
.Ll466:
# [995] write_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_INDEX);
leaq -48(%rbp),%rcx
movl $3320,%edx
call ARCH_$$_WRITE_PORTD$POINTER$WORD
.Ll467:
# [996] read_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_DATA);
leaq -48(%rbp),%rcx
movl $3324,%edx
call ARCH_$$_READ_PORTD$POINTER$WORD
.Ll468:
# [997] Result := Send;
movl -48(%rbp),%eax
movl %eax,-40(%rbp)
.Ll469:
# [998] end;
movl -40(%rbp),%eax
nop
leaq (%rbp),%rsp
popq %rbp
ret
.seh_endproc
.Lc208:
.Lt28:
.Ll470:

*and with -O2:*

.section .text.n_arch_$$_pciwriteword$word$word$word$word$word,"x" .balign 16,0x90
.globl ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD:
.Lc148:
# Temps allocated between rbp-16 and rbp-8
.seh_proc ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD .Ll471:
# [1014] begin
pushq %rbp
.seh_pushreg %rbp
.Lc150:
.Lc151:
movq %rsp,%rbp
.Lc152:
leaq -48(%rsp),%rsp
.seh_stackalloc 48
# Var bus located in register ax
# Var device located in register dx
# Var func located in register r8w
# Var regnum located in register r9w
# Var value located in register cx
movq %rbx,-16(%rbp)
.seh_savereg %rbx, 32
.seh_endprologue
# Var Send located at rbp-8, size=OS_32
movw %cx,%ax
movw 48(%rbp),%bx
# PeepHole Optimization,var11
.Ll472:
# [1015] Send := $80000000 or (bus shl 16) or (device shl 11) or (func shl
8) or (regnum and $fc);
andl $65535,%eax
shll $16,%eax
orl $2147483648,%eax
# PeepHole Optimization,var11
andl $65535,%edx
shll $11,%edx
orl %eax,%edx
# PeepHole Optimization,var11
andl $65535,%r8d
shll $8,%r8d
orl %edx,%r8d
# PeepHole Optimization,var1
# PeepHole Optimization,var11
andl $252,%r9d
orl %r8d,%r9d
movl %r9d,-8(%rbp)
.Ll473:
# [1016] write_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_INDEX);
leaq -8(%rbp),%rcx
movl $3320,%edx
call ARCH_$$_WRITE_PORTD$POINTER$WORD
.Ll474:
# [1017] write_portw(value, PCI_CONF_PORT_DATA);
movw %bx,%cx
# Var value located in register cx
# PeepHole Optimization,var11
andl $65535,%ecx
movl $3324,%edx
call ARCH_$$_WRITE_PORTW$WORD$WORD
.Ll475:
# [1018] end;
movq -16(%rbp),%rbx
leaq (%rbp),%rsp
popq %rbp
ret
.seh_endproc

The first thing that I realize was the the optimized version is not generating the correct source when is exiting since it should return "Send", but am I right? The assembler code of write_portd remains the same, Am I missing something?

Regards, Matias.

Reply by email

Matias Vara
to Matias Vara

I think the problem was the way write_portd() is implemented:

procedure write_portd(const Data: Pointer; const Port: Word); {$IFDEF ASMINLINE} inline; {$ENDIF}
asm // RCX: data, RDX: port

  {$IFDEF LINUX} mov dx, port {$ENDIF}

mov rsi, data // DX=port
outsd
end;

If I replace with something that does not use the outsd instruction, it works fine.

Matias

2018-01-10 15:55 GMT+01:00 Matias Vara :

Show quoted text 169 lines
Hello everyone, I am getting an exception when I enable the -O2 optimization. More precisaily, the line that stars with write_portd.... is corrupting the data section. This is the pascal code: function PciReadDword(const bus, device, func, regnum: UInt32): UInt32; var Send: DWORD; begin Send := $80000000 or (bus shl 16) or (device shl 11) or (func shl 8) or (regnum shl 2); write_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_INDEX); read_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_DATA); Result := Send; end; *which generates (without -02):* .section .text.n_arch_$$_pcireaddword$longword$longword$longword$ longword$$longword,"x" .balign 16,0x90 .globl ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$LONGWORD ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$LONGWORD: .Lc207: .seh_proc ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$ LONGWORD .Ll464: # [992] begin pushq %rbp .seh_pushreg %rbp .Lc209: .Lc210: movq %rsp,%rbp .Lc211: leaq -80(%rsp),%rsp .seh_stackalloc 80 .seh_endprologue # Var bus located at rbp-8, size=OS_32 # Var device located at rbp-16, size=OS_32 # Var func located at rbp-24, size=OS_32 # Var regnum located at rbp-32, size=OS_32 # Var $result located at rbp-40, size=OS_32 # Var Send located at rbp-48, size=OS_32 movl %ecx,-8(%rbp) movl %edx,-16(%rbp) movl %r8d,-24(%rbp) movl %r9d,-32(%rbp) .Ll465: # [993] Send := $80000000 or (bus shl 16) or (device shl 11) or (func shl 8) or (regnum shl 2); movl -8(%rbp),%eax shll $16,%eax orl $2147483648,%eax movl -16(%rbp),%edx shll $11,%edx orl %eax,%edx movl -24(%rbp),%eax shll $8,%eax orl %edx,%eax movl -32(%rbp),%edx shll $2,%edx orl %eax,%edx movl %edx,-48(%rbp) .Ll466: # [995] write_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_INDEX); leaq -48(%rbp),%rcx movl $3320,%edx call ARCH_$$_WRITE_PORTD$POINTER$WORD .Ll467: # [996] read_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_DATA); leaq -48(%rbp),%rcx movl $3324,%edx call ARCH_$$_READ_PORTD$POINTER$WORD .Ll468: # [997] Result := Send; movl -48(%rbp),%eax movl %eax,-40(%rbp) .Ll469: # [998] end; movl -40(%rbp),%eax nop leaq (%rbp),%rsp popq %rbp ret .seh_endproc .Lc208: .Lt28: .Ll470: *and with -O2:* .section .text.n_arch_$$_pciwriteword$word$word$word$word$word,"x" .balign 16,0x90 .globl ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD: .Lc148: # Temps allocated between rbp-16 and rbp-8 .seh_proc ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD .Ll471: # [1014] begin pushq %rbp .seh_pushreg %rbp .Lc150: .Lc151: movq %rsp,%rbp .Lc152: leaq -48(%rsp),%rsp .seh_stackalloc 48 # Var bus located in register ax # Var device located in register dx # Var func located in register r8w # Var regnum located in register r9w # Var value located in register cx movq %rbx,-16(%rbp) .seh_savereg %rbx, 32 .seh_endprologue # Var Send located at rbp-8, size=OS_32 movw %cx,%ax movw 48(%rbp),%bx # PeepHole Optimization,var11 .Ll472: # [1015] Send := $80000000 or (bus shl 16) or (device shl 11) or (func shl 8) or (regnum and $fc); andl $65535,%eax shll $16,%eax orl $2147483648,%eax # PeepHole Optimization,var11 andl $65535,%edx shll $11,%edx orl %eax,%edx # PeepHole Optimization,var11 andl $65535,%r8d shll $8,%r8d orl %edx,%r8d # PeepHole Optimization,var1 # PeepHole Optimization,var11 andl $252,%r9d orl %r8d,%r9d movl %r9d,-8(%rbp) .Ll473: # [1016] write_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_INDEX); leaq -8(%rbp),%rcx movl $3320,%edx call ARCH_$$_WRITE_PORTD$POINTER$WORD .Ll474: # [1017] write_portw(value, PCI_CONF_PORT_DATA); movw %bx,%cx # Var value located in register cx # PeepHole Optimization,var11 andl $65535,%ecx movl $3324,%edx call ARCH_$$_WRITE_PORTW$WORD$WORD .Ll475: # [1018] end; movq -16(%rbp),%rbx leaq (%rbp),%rsp popq %rbp ret .seh_endproc The first thing that I realize was the the optimized version is not generating the correct source when is exiting since it should return "Send", but am I right? The assembler code of write_portd remains the same, Am I missing something? Regards, Matias.

Reply by email

Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR
to Matias Vara: I am getting an exception when I enable the -O2 optimization. More precisaily, the line…

Hi,

Matias Vara wrote 34 lines
I am getting an exception when I enable the -O2 optimization. More precisaily, the line that stars with write_portd.... is corrupting the data section. This is the pascal code:  function PciReadDword(const bus, device, func, regnum: UInt32): UInt32; var   Send: DWORD; begin   Send := $80000000 or (bus shl 16) or (device shl 11) or (func shl 8) or (regnum shl 2);   write_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_INDEX);   read_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_DATA);   Result := Send; end;   which generates (without -02): .section .text.n_arch_$$_pcireaddword$longword$longword$longword$longword$$longword,"x" .balign 16,0x90 .globl ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$LONGWORD ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$LONGWORD: (***shipp***) and with -O2: .section .text.n_arch_$$_pciwriteword$word$word$word$word$word,"x" .balign 16,0x90 .globl ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD: The first thing that I realize was the the optimized version is not generating the correct source when is exiting since it should return "Send", but am I right? The assembler code of write_portd remains the same, Am I missing something? 

The -O2 version of the function you sent is from a different one, it's from a Write function, not a Read... So no wonder it doesn't return anything... :)

BTW, -O2 uses register variables, while -O- doesn't. If your assembler trashes one of them without preserving one, it can lead to crashes... But there could be many other reasons.

Without seeing the actual assembler functions it's hard to tell.

Charlie

Reply by email

Matias Vara
to Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR

Hi Karol and thanks you very much! I got confused with the function names, I feel very sorry.
As I said in my previous email, I fixed by rewriting the assembler function. However, I don't why it worked.
So I understand you correctly, if I use assembler in my procedures there could be a risk that I trash a variable that the compiler is using. Is the compiler warning me about this?

Matias

2018-01-10 17:14 GMT+01:00 Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) <

Show quoted text 59 lines
: Hi, On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Matias Vara wrote: > I am getting an exception when I enable the -O2 optimization. More > precisaily, the line that stars with write_portd.... is corrupting the > data section. This is the pascal code: > > function PciReadDword(const bus, device, func, regnum: UInt32): UInt32; > var > Send: DWORD; > begin > Send := $80000000 or (bus shl 16) or (device shl 11) or (func shl 8) or (regnum shl 2); > write_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_INDEX); > read_portd(@Send, PCI_CONF_PORT_DATA); > Result := Send; > end; > > which generates (without -02): > > .section .text.n_arch_$$_pcireaddword$longword$longword$longword$ longword$$longword,"x" > .balign 16,0x90 > .globl ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$ LONGWORD > ARCH_$$_PCIREADDWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$LONGWORD$$LONGWORD: > > (***shipp***) > > and with -O2: > > .section .text.n_arch_$$_pciwriteword$word$word$word$word$word,"x" > .balign 16,0x90 > .globl ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD > ARCH_$$_PCIWRITEWORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD$WORD: > > The first thing that I realize was the the optimized version is not > generating the correct source when is exiting since it should return > "Send", but am I right? The assembler code of write_portd remains the > same, Am I missing something? The -O2 version of the function you sent is from a different one, it's from a Write function, not a Read... So no wonder it doesn't return anything... :) BTW, -O2 uses register variables, while -O- doesn't. If your assembler trashes one of them without preserving one, it can lead to crashes... But there could be many other reasons. Without seeing the actual assembler functions it's hard to tell. Charlie _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Reply by email

Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR
to Matias Vara

Hi,

Matias Vara wrote
Hi Karol and thanks you very much! I got confused with the function names, I feel very sorry.As I said in my previous email, I fixed by rewriting the assembler function. However, I don't why it worked. 

By accident. Simply the register/stack/memory layout being different upon entry, and it worked by pure luck.

So I understand you correctly, if I use assembler in my procedures there could be a risk that I trash a variable that the compiler is using.

Yes. All operating systems and CPU architectures define a so called ABI or calling convention, which functions must respect. This details which registers are the parameters to be passed on, and which registers are free to destroy in a function and which ones *MUST* be saved/preserved (usually on the stack). There's no way around this. The compiler will expect that your assembly subfunctions play by the rules.

See here, for example, for x86:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_calling_conventions

Is the compiler warning me about this? 

No. Assembly is quite a minefield in this regard. If you use assembler, the compiler assumes you know what you're doing, and doesn't analyze the assembler function. You have to respect the ABI of your CPU *AND* target platform by hand, and save the nonvolatile registers.

(This is BTW, not Free Pascal specific. Delphi does the same, or more or less any other language which supports inline assembly.)

Charlie

Reply by email

Matias Vara
to Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR

Thank you very much Karol, I completly missed this point during the development of my kernel (Or maybe I had in mind sometime ago but I forgot it)
It was only when I decided to play with -02 that all these issues arrised.

Matias

2018-01-10 17:34 GMT+01:00 Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) <

Show quoted text 42 lines
: Hi, On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Matias Vara wrote: > Hi Karol and thanks you very much! I got confused with the function > names, I feel very sorry.As I said in my previous email, I fixed by > rewriting the assembler function. However, I don't why it worked. By accident. Simply the register/stack/memory layout being different upon entry, and it worked by pure luck. > So I understand you correctly, if I use assembler in my procedures there > could be a risk that I trash a variable that the compiler is using. Yes. All operating systems and CPU architectures define a so called ABI or calling convention, which functions must respect. This details which registers are the parameters to be passed on, and which registers are free to destroy in a function and which ones *MUST* be saved/preserved (usually on the stack). There's no way around this. The compiler will expect that your assembly subfunctions play by the rules. See here, for example, for x86: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_calling_conventions > Is the compiler warning me about this? No. Assembly is quite a minefield in this regard. If you use assembler, the compiler assumes you know what you're doing, and doesn't analyze the assembler function. You have to respect the ABI of your CPU *AND* target platform by hand, and save the nonvolatile registers. (This is BTW, not Free Pascal specific. Delphi does the same, or more or less any other language which supports inline assembly.) Charlie _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Reply by email

Matias Vara
to Matias Vara

BTW, this only applies to inline assembler functions rigth? In the case of normal procedures that contains a block asm end; there is no problem, Am I right?

Matias

2018-01-10 17:51 GMT+01:00 Matias Vara :

Show quoted text 52 lines
Thank you very much Karol, I completly missed this point during the development of my kernel (Or maybe I had in mind sometime ago but I forgot it) It was only when I decided to play with -02 that all these issues arrised. Matias 2018-01-10 17:34 GMT+01:00 Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) < >: > Hi, > > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Matias Vara wrote: > > > Hi Karol and thanks you very much! I got confused with the function > > names, I feel very sorry.As I said in my previous email, I fixed by > > rewriting the assembler function. However, I don't why it worked. > > By accident. Simply the register/stack/memory layout being different upon > entry, and it worked by pure luck. > > > So I understand you correctly, if I use assembler in my procedures there > > could be a risk that I trash a variable that the compiler is using. > > Yes. All operating systems and CPU architectures define a so called ABI or > calling convention, which functions must respect. This details which > registers are the parameters to be passed on, and which registers are free > to destroy in a function and which ones *MUST* be saved/preserved (usually > on the stack). There's no way around this. The compiler will expect that > your assembly subfunctions play by the rules. > > See here, for example, for x86: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_calling_conventions > > > Is the compiler warning me about this? > > No. Assembly is quite a minefield in this regard. If you use assembler, > the compiler assumes you know what you're doing, and doesn't analyze the > assembler function. You have to respect the ABI of your CPU *AND* target > platform by hand, and save the nonvolatile registers. > > (This is BTW, not Free Pascal specific. Delphi does the same, or more or > less any other language which supports inline assembly.) > > Charlie > > _______________________________________________ > fpc-pascal maillist - > http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal >

Reply by email

Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR
to Matias Vara: Thank you very much Karol, I completly missed this point during the development of my…

Hi,

Matias Vara wrote
Thank you very much Karol, I completly missed this point during the development of my kernel (Or maybe I had in mind sometime ago but I forgot it)It was only when I decided to play with -02 that all these issues arrised. 

BTW, your code (as shown by the parameter passing in your assembler dumps) seems to use the Microsoft x64 calling convention, which declares RSI value as callee-saved, and then your code overwrites that without saving.

So the fact that your code overwrites it, could be the culprit. (And then the OUTSD instruction also increases RSI by 4, so even if that MOV wouldn't be there, you'd still need to save it.)

Also note that the 64bit x86-64 ABI is very different between Linux and Windows, for example.

BTW, developing a kernel in Pascal is cool... ;)

Charlie

Reply by email

Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR
to Matias Vara: BTW, this only applies to inline assembler functions rigth? In the case of normal…

Hi,

Matias Vara wrote
BTW, this only applies to inline assembler functions rigth? In the case of normal procedures that contains a block asm end; there is no problem, Am I right?

No, it applies to *ALL* assembler code. Also inline blocks. The only difference is, for blocks you can hint the compiler which registers you use, so the compiler can also tailor code which improves the interaction with your assembler code:

https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/ref/refse87.html

This is not true for pure assembler functions tho', for performance reasons among others.

Charlie

Reply by email

Matias Vara
to Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR: BTW, your code (as shown by the parameter passing in your assembler dumps) seems to use…

Hello,

2018-01-10 18:03 GMT+01:00 Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) <

Show quoted text 23 lines
: Hi, On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Matias Vara wrote: > Thank you very much Karol, I completly missed this point during the > development of my kernel (Or maybe I had in mind sometime ago but I > forgot it)It was only when I decided to play with -02 that all these > issues arrised. BTW, your code (as shown by the parameter passing in your assembler dumps) seems to use the Microsoft x64 calling convention, which declares RSI value as callee-saved, and then your code overwrites that without saving. So the fact that your code overwrites it, could be the culprit. (And then the OUTSD instruction also increases RSI by 4, so even if that MOV wouldn't be there, you'd still need to save it.) Also note that the 64bit x86-64 ABI is very different between Linux and Windows, for example.

Thanks, I am going to review all the assembler code.

BTW, developing a kernel in Pascal is cool... ;)

It is indeed :)

Matias

Show quoted text 6 lines
Charlie _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Reply by email

Matias Vara
to Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR: No, it applies to *ALL* assembler code. Also inline blocks. The only difference is, for…

2018-01-10 18:09 GMT+01:00 Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) <

Show quoted text 22 lines
: Hi, On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Matias Vara wrote: > BTW, this only applies to inline assembler functions rigth? In the case > of normal procedures that contains a block asm end; there is no problem, > Am I right? No, it applies to *ALL* assembler code. Also inline blocks. The only difference is, for blocks you can hint the compiler which registers you use, so the compiler can also tailor code which improves the interaction with your assembler code: https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/ref/refse87.html This is not true for pure assembler functions tho', for performance reasons among others. Charlie

This is very interesting.

Thanks a lot.

_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Reply by email

Matias Vara
to Matias Vara

After fixing the assembler code and other issues, e.g., interruption handlers were not restoring all registers, I observed an speed up of ~12% with -O2 when running a simple webserver example. That's very impresive!

Thanks for you help, Matias.

2018-01-10 18:19 GMT+01:00 Matias Vara :

Show quoted text 37 lines
2018-01-10 18:09 GMT+01:00 Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) < >: > Hi, > > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Matias Vara wrote: > > > BTW, this only applies to inline assembler functions rigth? In the case > > of normal procedures that contains a block asm end; there is no problem, > > Am I right? > > No, it applies to *ALL* assembler code. Also inline blocks. The only > difference is, for blocks you can hint the compiler which registers you > use, so the compiler can also tailor code which improves the interaction > with your assembler code: > > https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/ref/refse87.html > > This is not true for pure assembler functions tho', for performance > reasons among others. > > Charlie > This is very interesting. Thanks a lot. > _______________________________________________ > fpc-pascal maillist - > http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal >

Reply by email