This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] asm qualifiers (PR55681) and asm inline
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, jason at redhat dot com, nathan at acm dot org, polacek at redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 19:15:20 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] asm qualifiers (PR55681) and asm inline
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20181206181055.GB3803@gate.crashing.org>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 12:10:56PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 04:38:16PM +0000, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > v2, with the input from Joseph taken into account.
> > This is the same "asm inline" patch as before, but now preceded by a
> > patch that makes all orderings of volatile/goto/inline valid, all other
> > type qualifiers invalid, all repetitions of qualifiers invalid.
> Committed now, with everyone's suggestions addressed.
> Is this okay for backport to 8? Maybe 7? After a week or so, of course.
> This will help the Linux people to use it sooner.
Not sure if in the backport we shouldn't keep accepting with warning like
before const asm and not do the changes of accepting in any order except
perhaps for the inline keyword in there?