From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2857 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2007 23:05:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 2849 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Nov 2007 23:05:32 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp.nildram.co.uk (HELO smtp.nildram.co.uk) (195.149.33.74) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Nov 2007 23:05:30 +0000 Received: from firetop.home (85-211-133-69.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk [85.211.133.69]) by smtp.nildram.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A11E2DE187; Sun, 4 Nov 2007 23:05:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from richard by firetop.home with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IooX1-00045S-Jc; Sun, 04 Nov 2007 23:05:27 +0000 From: Richard Sandiford To: "Andreas Krebbel" Mail-Followup-To: "Andreas Krebbel" ,Richard Guenther , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, rsandifo@nildram.co.uk Cc: Richard Guenther , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PING] Target hook for rewriting inline asm constraints References: <20071030115424.GA6864@homer.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <84fc9c000710310830i10fb4bc5vd8c73a3ade568811@mail.gmail.com> <20071031162911.GA13462@homer.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <84fc9c000710310943i7c45fadcs7f3558816218ffa3@mail.gmail.com> <20071031172121.GA14226@homer.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 23:05:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20071031172121.GA14226@homer.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> (Andreas Krebbel's message of "Wed\, 31 Oct 2007 18\:21\:21 +0100") Message-ID: <87zlxty5l4.fsf@firetop.home> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00144.txt.bz2 "Andreas Krebbel" writes: > So you actually can't support new addressing formats in the back end > without changing the semantics of it. The proper way would be to > disallow the "m" constraint in inline assemblies but thats probably a > bit late ;) Sorry if this has already been suggested, but why not just replace hard-coded uses of 'm' in constraint-handling code with uses of some target macro? You could then treat your current 'm' as an ordinary define_memory_constraint. Richard