> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> * H. Peter Anvin (
hpa@zytor.com) wrote:
>>> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>>> Ok, so the most flexible solution that I see, that should fit for both
>>>> x86 and x86_64 would be :
>>>> 1 byte : "=q" : "a", "b", "c", or "d" register for the i386. For
>>>> x86-64 it is equivalent to "r" class (for 8-bit
>>>> instructions that do not use upper halves).
>>>> 2, 4, 8 bytes : "=r" : A register operand is allowed provided that it is
>>>> in a
>>>> general register.
>>> Any reason to keep carrying this completely misleading comment chunk
>>> still?
>>>
>>> -hpa
>> This comment explains why I use the =q constraint for the 1 bytes
>> immediate value. It makes sure we use an instruction with 1-byte opcode,
>> without REX.R prefix, on x86_64.
>
> No, it doesn't. That would be "=Q".
>
> -hpa