This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
asm-reg stuff (was: Re: fix 15089)
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 23:27:50 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: asm-reg stuff (was: Re: fix 15089)
- References: <20040929025157.GA2893@redhat.com>
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Richard Henderson wrote:
> There's still a bit of documentation to do for the PR, but this
> fixes the invalid constant propagation demonstrated at the end.
If you think there's more to do docwise after extend.texi 1.222
(<URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-09/msg01210.html>)
try throwing a suggestion in this direction.
I know there's the call-clobbered undocumentation, mentioned at
<URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-09/msg01822.html>,
but which way *should* it be?:
What can be expected of the values of call-clobbered registers
used in asm-reg declarations; *should* they be clobbered by
calls (as is done in past and present) or should GCC protect
their integrity (e.g. by saving them around calls)? If not, is
it ok to emit a warning?
brgds, H-P