public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "ndesaulniers at google dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/108548] New: gcc asm goto with outputs not implicitly volatile
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 22:10:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-108548-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108548
Bug ID: 108548
Summary: gcc asm goto with outputs not implicitly volatile
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ndesaulniers at google dot com
CC: eli.friedman at gmail dot com, foom at fuhm dot net
Target Milestone: ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html#Volatile mentions:
> GCC’s optimizers sometimes discard asm statements if they determine there is no need for the output variables. ... Using the volatile qualifier disables these optimizations. asm statements that have no output operands and asm goto statements, are implicitly volatile.
So what about asm goto statements that do have outputs, which GCC recently
gained support for?
Looks like I get different codegen targeting x86 at -O2 with:
```
int foo (void) {
void *x;
asm goto (
"movq %l1, %0\n\t"
"jmp *%0"
:"=r"(x):::bar);
return 0;
bar:
return 1;
}
```
based on whether the asm goto statement is marked volatile or not.
Should asm goto statements with outputs be implicitly volatile (implying a bug
currently in GCC) or not (implying the documentation could perhaps be updated)?
next reply other threads:[~2023-01-25 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-25 22:10 ndesaulniers at google dot com [this message]
2023-01-25 22:17 ` [Bug middle-end/108548] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-108548-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).