From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10202 invoked by alias); 16 Dec 2013 20:47:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10189 invoked by uid 89); 16 Dec 2013 20:47:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 20:47:21 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rBGKlJYf027586 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 16 Dec 2013 15:47:19 -0500 Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (ovpn-116-55.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.55]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rBGKlHIY014388 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 16 Dec 2013 15:47:19 -0500 Message-ID: <52AF66D5.7070906@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 20:47:00 -0000 From: Florian Weimer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Luchezar Belev , gcc-help Subject: Re: immediate operands without dollar sign for inline asm References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-12/txt/msg00108.txt.bz2 On 12/16/2013 12:29 PM, Luchezar Belev wrote: > My question is: why is this feature not mentioned anywhere in the GCC > documentation and is so extremely hard to find info about? Does this > mean that it is planned for removal or deprecation? Can one rely on > it's presence in future GCC versions? Isn't it specific to a subset of all the architectures? If it's generic, it makes sense to add it to the Extended Asm documentation. The architecture-specific aspects of inline assembler mostly deal with constraints, which isn't the right place to document the prefix at the expansion site. Perhaps that's why it hasn't been documented before? -- Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security Team