From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 43FEF3858C39; Tue,  7 Mar 2023 17:22:59 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 43FEF3858C39
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1678209779;
	bh=NYCZNZ4IGcAEy0KJJwQTnNkxJ5MTzNCPkuGmLOkbk50=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=IJ6yc2fqzvdEKyZPgFOvnGgyjs08kFNlBFxONS0sS4CvDx6UxSv1N5YrYt1K2tn3i
	 O1bwC/sm6Gjxcsdy/o6m7No8TypSUJMTkTKHGjdk4pNCuFbGObx8jR7qXI3ZfurtMx
	 z4zbOJHwAAQWwqDrpq5QI7Gzmu3mHhwSPbuPLkeU=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/109057] Does GCC interpret assembly when deciding to
 optimize away a variable?
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 17:22:59 +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: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-109057-4-ioiyf3HPdR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109057-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109057-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109057

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>basically discarding it

No it is not. you just don't notice it there because goldbolt is hiding thi=
ngs
because it thinks it is unused.

If you use:
  asm volatile("#%0" : : "rm"(value) : "memory");

You get:
#LUT(%rdi)

Which is exactly what you expect.=