On 16/07/2021 18:42, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Of course, we may simply re-work the libgomp/GCN code -- but don't we first need to answer the question whether the current code is actually "bad"? Aren't we going to get a lot of similar reports from kernel/embedded/other low-level software developers, once this is out in the wild? I mean:
GCN already uses address 4 for this value because address 0 caused problems with null-pointer checks.
It really ought not be this hard. :-( Andrew
