From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17875 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2005 15:51:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 17070 invoked by uid 48); 21 Jan 2005 15:50:47 -0000 Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:51:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050121155047.17069.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "falk at debian dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050120202246.19549.drab@kepler.fjfi.cvut.cz> References: <20050120202246.19549.drab@kepler.fjfi.cvut.cz> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/19549] Register allocation problem in inline asm on x86. X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg03051.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-01-21 15:50 ------- (In reply to comment #3) > It still a dup of bug 11203 and here is why, the a gets placed in different register for the inline-asm at > -O0 but -O1 and above, we use the same register/offset but PR 11203 has a testcase where it does not > compile at -O0 to -O3 but that is because the memory operands share in common areas. > > Anyways this inline-asm is useless as the operands are all the same which is why it works at -O1 I can't quite follow. The reporter says this test case does *not* compile at -O1. In my opinion, gcc should be able to compile this asm at -O1 and above. Maybe somebody else can comment on this... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19549