From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-482385-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 125442 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2015 13:45:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 125176 invoked by uid 48); 31 Mar 2015 13:45:50 -0000
From: "mjh at edg dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug inline-asm/65640] New: multiple alternative constraints and earlyclobbers
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 14:19:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: inline-asm
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mjh at edg 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-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
Message-ID: <bug-65640-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg03529.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65640

            Bug ID: 65640
           Summary: multiple alternative constraints and earlyclobbers
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.9.2
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: inline-asm
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: mjh at edg dot com

There seems to be an issue with earlyclobbers and multiple alternative
constraints.  Take this example:

  int f(int out, int in) {
    asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&a" (out) : "b" (in));        // Okay
    asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&b" (out) : "b" (in));        // Expected error
    asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&a" (out) : "a" (in));        // Expected error
    asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&a,&b" (out) : "b,b" (in));   // Okay
    asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&a,&b" (out) : "a,a" (in));   // Unexpected error
    asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&b,&a" (out) : "b,b" (in));   // Okay
    asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&b,&a" (out) : "a,a" (in));   // Okay
    return out;
  }

With 4.9.2, I see three errors:

$ g++492 -S ex.c
ex.c: In function 'int f(int, int)':
ex.c:3:47: error: 'asm' operand has impossible constraints
     asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&b" (out) : "b" (in));        // Expected error
                                               ^
ex.c:4:47: error: 'asm' operand has impossible constraints
     asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&a" (out) : "a" (in));        // Expected error
                                               ^
ex.c:6:52: error: 'asm' operand has impossible constraints
     asm("foo %1,%0;" : "=&a,&b" (out) : "a,a" (in));   // Unexpected error
                                                    ^

The first two are expected, but I'm at a loss to explain the third error.  In
all four of the multi alternative constrain cases, there is exactly one "good"
constraint and one "bad" constraint in the pair, yet only one of the four cases
is diagnosed.

What is the expected behavior for this case?