From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 80580 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2017 11:06:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 80566 invoked by uid 89); 28 Feb 2017 11:06:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= 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; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:06:54 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76F4861D07; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:06:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-117-76.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.76]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v1SB6qNC018060 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:06:54 -0500 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v1SB6nxl011486; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:06:50 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id v1SB6lDg011485; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:06:47 +0100 Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:08:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: Uros Bizjak , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [RFA PATCH, i386]: Warn for 64-bit values in general-reg asm operands and error out for 8-bit values in invalid GR asm operand Message-ID: <20170228110647.GI1849@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-02/txt/msg01647.txt.bz2 On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:41:56AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > 2017-02-28 Uros Bizjak > > > > * config/i386/i386.c (print_reg): Warn for values of 64-bit size > > in integer register on 32-bit targets. Error out for values of > > 8-bit size in invalid integer register. > > > > testsuite/ChangeLog: > > > > 2017-02-28 Uros Bizjak > > > > * gcc.target/i386/invsize-1.c: New test. > > * gcc.target/i386/invsize-2.c: Ditto. > > > > OK for mainline in stage 4? > > Yes. Have you tried to build say Linux kernel or firefox or similar large codebase with lots of inline asm with that? What constraint should people use for long long vars in 32-bit code? "A" constraint is used a lot in 32-bit code (say for inline asm with rdtsc), but what if you need more than one long long input? Jakub