From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: Extend inline asm syntax with size spec Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 05:02:46 -0500 Message-ID: <20181008100245.GP29268@gate.crashing.org> References: <20181003213100.189959-1-namit@vmware.com> <20181007091805.GA30687@zn.tnic> <20181007132228.GJ29268@gate.crashing.org> <20181008073128.GL29268@gate.crashing.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: To: Richard Biener Cc: Michael Matz , Borislav Petkov , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Nadav Amit , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Masahiro Yamada , Sam Ravnborg , Alok Kataria , Christopher Li , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "H. Peter Anvin" , Jan Beulich , Josh Poimboeuf , Juergen Gross , Kate Stewart , Kees Cook , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Philippe Ombredanne , exb.com, Thomas Gleixner , virtualization@lists.linux-foundatio List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 11:07:46AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > All of a targets register names and alternative register names are > > allowed in the clobber list. Will that never conflict with an attribute > > name? We already *have* syntax for specifying attributes on an asm (on > > *any* statement even), so mixing these two things has no advantage. > > Heh, but I failed to make an example with attribute synatx working. > IIRC attributes do not work on stmts. What could work is to use > a #pragma though. Apparently statement attributes currently(?) only work for null statements. Oh well. Segher