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 776A93857BB2; Mon,  7 Aug 2023 12:59:26 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 776A93857BB2
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1691413166;
	bh=4uG/gi6K43NR0hoLGDzpiX0lYh/kXapQbGhWLatz39E=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=KbuzEsbUVhUA9+pkS8jt5T3mz+PO+e5o2OBPXqQ+2Z4mBzVHw7ZeTH5if3kTA1kw/
	 rSdSE4AzKHFnTFdepxU26aGRWDKcYpuIfWZvpmjhEfzg4xwDyg9+5+5Yv5Viw7HDwm
	 V5LBe+w2UNkdOVz7V2QwDyi66/jaCKHLXpEidiE0=
From: "matz at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/110899] RFE: Attributes preserve_most and preserve_all
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2023 12:59:26 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: matz at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: <bug-110899-4-msGLvV3y5W@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-110899-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-110899-4@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=3D110899

--- Comment #4 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #2)
> I tried to write up something for the x86-64 psABI:
>=20
> Document the ABI for __preserve_most__ function calls
> <https://gitlab.com/x86-psABIs/x86-64-ABI/-/merge_requests/45>
>=20
> This should match what Clang implements (but not what it documents).

Shouldn't we first discuss whether any of this, or particular aspects of it,
are
a good idea at all, before specifying behaviour that a random compiler happ=
ened
to implement?=