https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91886
--- Comment #19 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Rich Felker from comment #16) > > Using "ws" in inline asm never made sense. It was always the same as > > "wa", for all cases where either could be used in inline asm at all. > > It made sense insomuch as it was documented and was the most > clearly-documented as matching the intended usage case, and still makes > sense in that the other widely-used compiler did not properly (according to > your interpretation) implement "wa", so that "ws" was the only constraint > that worked with both. I am saying it is a mistake that GCC ever documented this for public use. Every use of "ws" in inline asm should be "wa". If that doesn't work with LLVM, then LLVM needs fixing. After both musl and LLVM are fixed, if you then *still* feel you need "ws", then we can talk of course. Deal?
