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 630683857349; Thu,  4 May 2023 07:15:44 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 630683857349
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1683184544;
	bh=ciVnACV5cmVtLzbECUoQK2Qg/MOlKEcPg8SMFY3IPqk=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=B0ob0iLH83kkFpAax7NcEXlo/k2Q2bQJgxJENJjEjAhQ7+RU1Y6Qqf14e15ackY6G
	 kRchenWmWvOdVMhdSw1IRNWDjFeef9DcPTJnl3Oqv8RalW2GU/2bzfBwBClB73v2GH
	 xt4o9e96SxM091YinSv56cELoe+KjGNlNZImwPgE=
From: "jbeulich at suse 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, 04 May 2023 07:15:43 +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: jbeulich at suse 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-qrDMY7crTd@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 #16 from jbeulich at suse dot com ---
(In reply to LIU Hao from comment #15)
> This is accepted by ML64:
>=20
> ```
> PUBLIC	main
> EXTRN	rip:DWORD
> _TEXT	SEGMENT
> main	PROC
> 	mov	eax, DWORD PTR rip
> 	ret	0
> main	ENDP
> _TEXT	ENDS
> END
> ```

Which version? And did you try other register names? Unfortunately the newe=
st I
have access to right now is 12.x, and as said in #14 register names other t=
han
"rip" won't work there when (attempted to be) used as symbols. Clearly ther=
e's
little point in dealing with "rip" alone.

> Does it make sense to create kinda compatibility mode for ML, in addition=
 to
> MASM, if they are deemed to be incompatible?=20

ML =3D=3D MASM, at least for me (ML and ML64 are merely the names of the
[non-ancient] executables).=