From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 45473 invoked by alias); 26 Jan 2016 12:11:42 -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 45461 invoked by uid 89); 26 Jan 2016 12:11:41 -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=Hx-languages-length:396 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 (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:11:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C90E33024BE; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:11:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn1-4-91.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.4.91]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u0QCBa03008444; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:11:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Wonly-top-basic-asm To: Segher Boessenkool , David Wohlferd References: <56A54EF9.8060006@LimeGreenSocks.com> <20160126002917.GA25851@gate.crashing.org> Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Richard Henderson , jason@redhat.com, sandra@codesourcery.com, Paul_Koning@Dell.com, Jeff Law , bernds_cb1@t-online.de, Bernd Edlinger , Andrew Haley From: Bernd Schmidt Message-ID: <56A76278.1090305@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:11:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160126002917.GA25851@gate.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-01/txt/msg01960.txt.bz2 On 01/26/2016 01:29 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > In my opinion we should not warn for any asm that means the same both > as basic and as extended asm. The problem then becomes, what *is* the > meaning of a basic asm, what does it clobber. I think this may be too hard to figure out in general without parsing the asm string, which we don't really want to do. Bernd