From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29860 invoked by alias); 15 Mar 2003 19:36:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 29835 invoked by uid 71); 15 Mar 2003 19:36:00 -0000 Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 19:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030315193600.29834.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: jason@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Adam Lackorzynski Subject: Re: inline-asm/9570: [3.3/3.4 regression] Assember error with -finline-functions with g++-3.3 Reply-To: Adam Lackorzynski X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg01033.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR inline-asm/9570; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Adam Lackorzynski To: jason@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: inline-asm/9570: [3.3/3.4 regression] Assember error with -finline-functions with g++-3.3 Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 20:29:27 +0100 Hi, On Sat Mar 15, 2003 at 17:24:14 -0000, jason@gcc.gnu.org wrote: > Synopsis: [3.3/3.4 regression] Assember error with -finline-functions with g++-3.3 > > State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->closed > State-Changed-By: jason > State-Changed-When: Sat Mar 15 17:24:13 2003 > State-Changed-Why: > This is not a bug. Your code assumes that the inline assembly > will be emitted after the definition of foo(), but if foo() is > inline (as a result of -finline-functions), it is deferred until > EOF, so the inline assembly is emitted after the definition of i. > i lives in .bss, so you end up trying to emit executable code into > .bss, which doesn't work very well. You probably want to wrap > that code in .pushsection ".text" and .popsection > > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=9570 Just a small annotation: I think the problem is the location of the "b" definition. If I pull the definition of "b" out of the function, the test case compiles. Looking at the asm-code, the place of the definition (or whatever it exactly is) of b differs and if it's below the inline asm code, it doesn't work. --- x.c Sat Mar 15 19:56:23 2003 +++ x2.c Sat Mar 15 19:56:36 2003 @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ int i = 0; -void foo() { static bool b; +void foo() { if (! i) asm("movl %%esp, %0" : "=r" (i)); } Adding .pushsection and .popsection around the call does seem to fix it as well. Thanks, Adam -- Adam adam@os.inf.tu-dresden.de Lackorzynski http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/~adam/