(I fill disappointed people even before writing this very elementary question...)

I've been searching for a while but can't find a more direct method. Is not possible to perform the multiplication without taking the absolute value of both operands first? I'm trying to do 64x64 to get 128-bit answer, but the code and description I've seen so far takes the absolute value of the operands and then performs negation of the 128 result when the sign of the operands were different.

This also has to be done this way in the case I promote both operands to 128-bit signed values first? (And I do 128x128 to get 128 answer this time)*

If someone has a good reference of how imul works internally I would like it as it seems I need to refresh my memory with some basic concepts...

* Almost convinced it is not required, but I don't know anymore...

PS: Note that "(i)mul r64/m64" is not an option, "(i)mul r32/mem32" at most.

You may find some notes about it here.

LocoDelAssembly
I'm trying to do 64x64 to get 128-bit answer, but the code and description I've seen so far takes the absolute value of the operands and then performs negation of the 128 result when the sign of the operands were different.

My question: "xoring" or "xorring"?

Without sign detection (i.e. ignore the sign bits) you can get the lower half of the result without any extra code. It is only the high half that creates the difference.

64x64 ---> 64 means you don't have to care about the sign bits.
128x128 ---> 128 means you don't have to care about the sign bits.
64x64 ---> 128 means you do have to consider the sign bits.

There really is no other way.

revolution
Without sign detection (i.e. ignore the sign bits) you can get the lower half of the result without any extra code. It is only the high half that creates the difference.

-1, what will you say?

revolution
64x64 ---> 64
128x128 ---> 128
64x64 ---> 128

64 bit signed * 64 bit signed = as maximum (2^64)-1 * (2^64)-1 = (2^128)-(2^64-1) ~ 2^128 i.e. ---> 128
revolution once told this and now is negating himself It may happen i did not understand that "64x64 ---> 64" etc.

128 means log(2;64 signed * 64 signed)

No problem.

-1 * -1 = 1
(2^64-1) * (2^64-1) = (0xff...fe00..01) or 0x00...01 when just taking the lower 64 bits.

i wrote
64 bit signed * 64 bit signed = as maximum (2^64)-1 * (2^64)-1 = (2^128)-(2^64-1) ~ 2^128 i.e. ---> 128
wrong minuend -1 used, -2 must be

LocoDelAssembly, do you prefer general purpose registers only?

Got it, thanks guys.

LocoDelAssembly, i was a bit wrong with the ranges.
Maximum one we may get is (maximum negative)^2 i.e. there will be positive: -2^63 * -2^63 = 2^126 =
= 0100..0b = $4..0.
As you can see, multiplying 64*64, 128bit got.
At my oppinion |64| * |64| is the easiest.
If you fill difficult with those lo-o-ngish numbers imagine xxxxb is a dword then xxxx'xxxxb will be a qword. Hence 1000'0000b is max.neg and 0111'1111b is max.pos. Tomasz calls this extrapolation(and he is right).
Well, max.pos*max.pos < max.neg.*max.neg = (2^63-1)^2 <- extrapolation. Remembering that (a+b)^2 = (a+b)(a+b) = aa+ab+ba+bb = a^2+2ab+b^2 we get (2^63)^2 + 2*2^63*(-1) + (-1)^2 = 2^126 - 2^1*2^63 + 1 = 2^126 - 2^64 + 1 = 2^126-1 - 2^64-1 + 3.

Currently i'm not at my own pc and text formating may be inconvinient, sorry.