Message-Id: <4.2.2.19991130111111.00aa4ec0@dictator.nt.tuwien.ac.at>
X-Sender: tony AT dictator DOT nt DOT tuwien DOT ac DOT at
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:18:02 +0100
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
From: Anton Helm <tony AT dictator DOT nt DOT tuwien DOT ac DOT at>
Subject: Re: Problems with DJGPP lib and grx23
In-Reply-To: <81u3rb$90k@acp3bf.knirsch.de>
References: <4 DOT 2 DOT 0 DOT 58 DOT 19991126181032 DOT 00a65c40 AT hal DOT nt DOT tuwien DOT ac DOT at>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

At 03:50 PM 11/29/99 , you wrote:

 >>No, it isn't. That '99' is decimal, I think, i.e. it's the code found
 >at address 0x63 in the disassembled listing, and that code is
 >

 >   63:  8a 21           movb   (%ecx),%ah

 >I.e., it chose %ecx for %3. But that's *wrong*. It shouldn't have done
 >that, as %ch which is explicitly used is part of %ecx, and thus %ecx
 >is not available for holding an input/output expression.
 >
 >So it looks like putting '%ch' into the output register list of that asm
 >block was not enough. Whole %ecx will have to be put there... I don't
 >know the exact syntax, though...

Ahhhh. So finally we are getting somewhere. Thanks a lot. 
The problems are therefore related to the patches that make
the inline asm compile with gcc 2.95. 

Tony