From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32201 invoked by alias); 4 Jul 2011 20:32:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 32184 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Jul 2011 20:32:20 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 20:32:07 +0000 From: "scovich at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug inline-asm/49611] Inline asm should support input/output of flags X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: scovich at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 20:32:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00259.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49611 --- Comment #2 from Ryan Johnson 2011-07-04 20:32:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Making this work reliably is probably more work than making GCC use the flags > from more cases from regular C code. Does that mean each such case would need to be identified individually and then hard-wired into i386.md? The existence of modes like CCGC, CCGOC, CCNO, etc. in i386-modes.def made me hope that some high-level mechanism existed for reasoning about the semantics of condition codes. Or does that mechanism exist, and is just difficult to expose to inline asm for some reason?