Post-increment constraint in inline assembly (SuperH)
Segher Boessenkool
segher@kernel.crashing.org
Mon Jan 29 23:51:00 GMT 2018
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 05:57:47PM +0100, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> YMMV, I am not even sure if it is correct or even makes complete sense.
>
> The "m>"(*src) operand doesn't even express that src is changing, and
> the constraint allows to use post-increment, but does not force it.
src does not change. If the compiler chooses to use a post-increment
then this asm will increment the register used. Which is equal to src
on input to this asm, but not on output in that case.
src is a C variable. The compiler translates C to assembler code that
implements the same stuff. Inline assembler integrates with C and the
internal GCC representation, not directly with the generated assembler
code. Extended asm is not like basic asm (which essentially just drops
a block of assembler code in the middle of the compiler's output, no
questions asked).
> And my experience with inline asm is this: if one doesn't express all
> side effects (which is the case for "m>"(src)), then the asm will bite
> you sooner or later; even it it appeared to work fine in the past.
Certainly. But "m>" describes everything as it should.
Segher
More information about the Gcc-help
mailing list