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 F1DF838555B0; Thu, 11 May 2023 10:58:56 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F1DF838555B0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1683802736;
	bh=cR0IJ/Yv09M9QFrZA1qaPEeIpOEeVrjf532DR0ROLlk=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=AOHTin6EFMvv7pTkSAUO6qjdm1VG5AXIgpNwmSzolho4+ju9lP18GwK6SokE6i1Gc
	 syNaSOBjsWShc/sL35oQHMH4rx4xq5x9nMD9g+CMIu4R5uce35S8HWlPjyGSPwGwBL
	 zJ1Arx9EuBNAz0fsVTb666MU4Y1EMMwrTmZFWGnM=
From: "lh_mouse at 126 dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/53929] [meta-bug] -masm=intel with global symbol
Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 10:58:55 +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: 4.6.3
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: assemble-failure, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: minor
X-Bugzilla-Who: lh_mouse at 126 dot com
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: <bug-53929-4-NOoIF1hhQn@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-53929-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-53929-4@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=3D53929

--- Comment #19 from LIU Hao <lh_mouse at 126 dot com> ---
(In reply to jbeulich from comment #11)
> I have a rough plan on the gas side, but that will then need a gcc side
> change as well: For a couple of years we have had quoted symbol names the=
re.
> While this doesn't currently work right in a number of cases (including t=
he
> one needed here) the plan is to make e.g.
>=20
>     mov eax, "ecx"
>=20
> not be treated the same as
>=20
>     mov eax, ecx
>=20
> but considering "ecx" a symbol name due to the quotation. Obviously gcc's

I don't like double quotes here, because it looks something different, like=
 in
C. Would it make some sense if we take the approach for MIPS and AArch64 [1=
],
so

  mov eax, %ecx

or

  mov eax, :ecx

denotes `ecx` is the name of a label, and otherwise a register. Also, such a
prefix should be optional, so people who write assembly can omit it if they
carefully avoid such names.


[1] https://maskray.me/blog/2023-05-08-assemblers=