From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38900)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1VWk72-0005MF-60
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 05:43:30 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1VWk6v-0002vf-KR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 05:43:24 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55474)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1VWk6v-0002vC-Cl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 05:43:17 -0400
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 12:43:15 +0300
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20131017094315.GQ15657@redhat.com>
References: <20131016194653.GA10517@redhat.com>
	<20131017062751.GK15657@redhat.com>
	<20131017081231.GA13975@redhat.com>
	<20131017082027.GA16998@redhat.com>
	<20131017082737.GA14218@redhat.com>
	<20131017083441.GA20731@redhat.com>
	<20131017092858.GB14596@redhat.com>
	<20131017093339.GO15657@redhat.com>
	<20131017094446.GC14648@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131017094446.GC14648@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] kvm-unittest: fix build with gcc 4.3.X and
	older
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:44:46PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:33:39PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > It just papers over the problem. Compiler should either complain that it
> > > > does not know what %w0 or complain that variable length does not match
> > > > assembly
> > > 
> > > Of course it can't. Compiler does not parse assembly at all:
> > > these are just constant strings as far as it's concerned.
> > > 
> > Compiler does not pars assembly itself but it parses things like %w0 to
> > know what assembly to emit. That is why it complained about %d0 in the
> > first place.
> 
> Right. I meant that with this: "outl %0" it has no chance to figure out
> that outl needs eax. It has to go by variable type. 
Yes.

--
			Gleb.