similar to: [LLVMdev] Intel asm

Hi Chris, > The LLVM X86 backend started out emitting intel mode for use with GAS > and it's "intel syntax mode" (which does use registers with %'s). > Unfortunately GAS has (or commonly available versions have) a number > of bugs in intel syntax mode (e.g. you can't define a function named > 'dword'), so we switched to using AT&T syntax. Ah, OK.

On Mon, 1 May 2006, Ralph Corderoy wrote: >> The LLVM X86 backend started out emitting intel mode for use with GAS >> and it's "intel syntax mode" (which does use registers with %'s). >> Unfortunately GAS has (or commonly available versions have) a number >> of bugs in intel syntax mode (e.g. you can't define a function named >> 'dword'),

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006, Jeff Cohen wrote: > We know. Someone offered to do the Intel version, but did little more than a > huge cut and paste of the AT&T version and then lost interest. No one else > has had the time or inclination to finish the (barely begun) job. Patches > accepted :) Actually, that's not true. The LLVM X86 backend started out emitting intel mode for

On Mon, 1 May 2006, Jeff Cohen wrote: > Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Mon, 1 May 2006, Ralph Corderoy wrote: >>> NASM might be the nicer target since it's GNU LGPL and runs on multiple >>> OS. Its home page is broken at the moment, but the manual pages work. >>> >>> http://nasm.sourceforge.net/doc/html/nasmdoc0.html >> >> That's

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 1 May 2006, Ralph Corderoy wrote: > >> >> NASM might be the nicer target since it's GNU LGPL and runs on multiple >> OS. Its home page is broken at the moment, but the manual pages work. >> >> http://nasm.sourceforge.net/doc/html/nasmdoc0.html > > That's fine with me. The instructions are in true intel mode now,

Ok, less talk and more action. I just implemented proper Microsoft ML/MASM support. It probably has a few rough edges, so if anyone wants to try it out please do and let me know if you encounter any problems. Note that you cannot take a bytecode file created by llvm-gcc on Unix, move it to Windows, translate it to Intel syntax assembler, assemble it with ML and expect it to work.

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 1 May 2006, Jeff Cohen wrote: >> Chris Lattner wrote: >>> On Mon, 1 May 2006, Ralph Corderoy wrote: >>>> NASM might be the nicer target since it's GNU LGPL and runs on >>>> multiple >>>> OS. Its home page is broken at the moment, but the manual pages work. >>>> >>>>

Hi Matthew, On Feb 15, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Matthew Huck wrote: > Hi, > It doesn't compile with yasm, or nasm Where did you get the idea that "Intel syntax" means NASM? LLVM actually produces assembly files that can be fed to GAS, or to LLVM's MC framework. (In fact, it's missing a .intel_syntax directive so GAS knows it needs to assemble instructions according to

Hello, David > Is the Intel AsmPrinter meant to produce asm that is understood by gas or > is it only meant to satisfy NASM, etc.? It's expected to produce assembler, which is understood by masm mainly. However, don't expect much from this asmprinter - masm does not have many features required to emit assembler properly. -- WBR, Anton Korobeynikov

Hi Jeff, > > I notice `lli -print-machineinstrs -x86-asm-syntax=(att|intel)' both > > prefix registers with `%'. Is this right? I thought AT&T did this > > and Intel didn't. The GNU gas manual concurs. > > > > http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/manual/gas-2.9.1/html_chapter/as_16.html > > The Intel version is just a clone of the

On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, Jeff Cohen wrote: Jeff, many appologies. I slightly misread what you wrote, and came across more strongly that was appropriate: I'm sorry! :( :( > Let's see. Ralph correctly points out that LLVM isn't producing anything > like Intel syntax. ... This is not true. LLVM produces something very close to what GAS accepts in intel mode: that is, we

We know. Someone offered to do the Intel version, but did little more than a huge cut and paste of the AT&T version and then lost interest. No one else has had the time or inclination to finish the (barely begun) job. Patches accepted :) Ralph Corderoy wrote: > Hi, > > >> It's a long way towards it: >> >> # AT&T. # Intel.

Hi, It doesn't compile with yasm, or nasm (reports invalid combination of opcode and operands), and mov _x,EAX is meaningless as _x is just a label (an numeric constant that happens to be an address), so it would have to be dereferenced to get to the memory at that address, otherwise it's like saying mov 0x12341234, EAX Now, my asm skills are not that great, so I'm prepared to be

It would be nice to be able to use clang/llvm without GNU toolchain dependencies. Just out of curioisty what does the --x86-asm-syntax=intel actually mean then? Does this not get used? Is this a different syntax than the AT&T variety (forgive me if this is an obvious question)? I tried downloading FASM last night and it seemed handle some of the output, the one thing it didn't like was

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:40 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> wrote: > On 07/14/2013 12:49 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > This is also why the Intel manuals point out that "some assemblers" can > take things like: > > bt[l] $63,(%rsi) > > ... and turn it into: > > btl $31,4(%rsi) > > This is definitely the friendly thing to

The Intel version is just a clone of the AT&T version at this time. No one has yet taken the time to make it produce actual Intel syntax. Ralph Corderoy wrote: > Hi, > > I notice `lli -print-machineinstrs -x86-asm-syntax=(att|intel)' both > prefix registers with `%'. Is this right? I thought AT&T did this and > Intel didn't. The GNU gas manual concurs. >

Hi, I notice `lli -print-machineinstrs -x86-asm-syntax=(att|intel)' both prefix registers with `%'. Is this right? I thought AT&T did this and Intel didn't. The GNU gas manual concurs. http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/manual/gas-2.9.1/html_chapter/as_16.html Cheers, Ralph.

Van Dijck, Tom wrote: > Hey, > > I've been trying this for a couple days now, finding different assemblers and trying different options but I can't figure it out.. > I must be missing something very obvious. > > I got a simple "hello world" app in llvm, making the .bc file using 'llvm-as test.llvm -o=test.bc' works fine. > then I can use llvm-ld to

On Tuesday 16 June 2009 09:48, Aaron Gray wrote: > Appently the GAS Intel backend has flaws and does not work correctly anyway > so the X86IntelAsm backend is designed only to target MASM anyway. gas Intel syntax is indeed broken in LLVM. I'd love to make it work but my work has not (yet) allocated time for that. Maybe I can hack LLVM on the weekends. :) The above discussion leads

On Jun 16, 2009, at 3:12 PM, David Greene wrote: > On Tuesday 16 June 2009 09:48, Aaron Gray wrote: > >> Appently the GAS Intel backend has flaws and does not work >> correctly anyway >> so the X86IntelAsm backend is designed only to target MASM anyway. > > gas Intel syntax is indeed broken in LLVM. I'd love to make it work > but > my work has not