Make inline assembler clang-friendly [from HEAD].

crypto/md32_common.h

@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@
 				asm (			\
 				"roll %1,%0"		\
 				: "=r"(ret)		\
-				: "I"(n), "0"(a)	\
+				: "I"(n), "0"((unsigned int)(a))	\
 				: "cc");		\
 			   ret;				\
 			})
@@ -383,6 +383,7 @@ int HASH_FINAL (unsigned char *md, HASH_CTX *c)
 	}
 
 #ifndef MD32_REG_T
+#if defined(__alpha) || defined(__sparcv9) || defined(__mips)
 #define MD32_REG_T long
 /*
  * This comment was originaly written for MD5, which is why it
@@ -400,9 +401,15 @@ int HASH_FINAL (unsigned char *md, HASH_CTX *c)
  * Well, to be honest it should say that this *prevents* 
  * performance degradation.
  *				<appro@fy.chalmers.se>
- * Apparently there're LP64 compilers that generate better
+ */
- * code if A-D are declared int. Most notably GCC-x86_64
+#else
- * generates better code.
+/*
+ * Above is not absolute and there are LP64 compilers that
+ * generate better code if MD32_REG_T is defined int. The above
+ * pre-processor condition reflects the circumstances under which
+ * the conclusion was made and is subject to further extension.
  *				<appro@fy.chalmers.se>
  */
+#define MD32_REG_T int
+#endif
 #endif

crypto/rc5/rc5_locl.h

@@ -154,14 +154,14 @@
 #  define ROTATE_l32(a,n)	({ register unsigned int ret;	\
 					asm ("roll %%cl,%0"	\
 						: "=r"(ret)	\
-						: "c"(n),"0"(a)	\
+						: "c"(n),"0"((unsigned int)(a))	\
 						: "cc");	\
 					ret;			\
 				})
 #  define ROTATE_r32(a,n)	({ register unsigned int ret;	\
 					asm ("rorl %%cl,%0"	\
 						: "=r"(ret)	\
-						: "c"(n),"0"(a)	\
+						: "c"(n),"0"((unsigned int)(a))	\
 						: "cc");	\
 					ret;			\
 				})