From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id F12123858D20; Mon, 26 Jun 2023 23:38:08 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F12123858D20 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1687822688; bh=l/VT8FWb4z6auQgLdAVd3j/wsNBm1kmtDmtT3SYvHlA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=yK4UvzmkgNMObC72V+9btp5mDqy+5RNsRexqBW46KeZrdXmgNVPCXC5TaEyFx/bDI LF+62FeNqhDfms73bUp9z9lVu/mSrt3kR4bb0mNMKIeuX9mh5Ygpq/wCsAA1a5lpDq TTyvSFzW21w9spBLubkrhK+rRsQI77s7EcDOIX+Q= From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/103979] asm goto is not considered volatile with output operands Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 23:38:07 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, inline-asm, wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D103979 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > I think we shouldn't just follow blindly the docs, but see what e.g. Linux > kernel as heavy user of asm goto with outputs (and I think mostly without > volatile) wants. They will need volatile, at least on powerpc. The reason is they use asm go= to now for loading/storing from/to userspace. PR 110420 is another case where = asm goto is removed on accident due not to being volatile.=