[Bug gas/30856] Regression: operand size mismatch for `push'

[jbeulich at suse dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30856

--- Comment #7 from Jan Beulich <jbeulich at suse dot com> ---
(In reply to Antoni Boucher from comment #6)
> Do you mean that gcc produces invalid asm when using the Intel syntax and
> should be using pushq?

No. "push offset ..." is the correct form in Intel syntax. What I'm saying is
that it is wrong to emit such code without -mcmodel=kernel, for there not being
any guarantee that the resulting code will actually link. (At the same time an
assembly programmer may write such code, knowing the target environment.)

> I was under the impression that suffixes like q was ATT syntax, but I
> couldn't find any reference of the intel syntax allowed in GNU as. It does
> seem to allow pushq even for the Intel syntax, though.

It does, but more by mistake than deliberately.

> Other assemblers allow "push qword".

That's a different form of push, with a memory operand (here we're talking
about immediate / address operands).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.