On 11/23/2015 03:04 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 21/11/15 12:56, David Wohlferd wrote:
So, what now?
While I'd like to take the big step and start kicking out warnings for
non-top-level right now, that may be too bold for phase 3. A more
modest step for v6 would just provide a way to find them (maybe
something like -Wnon-top-basic-asm or -Wonly-top-basic-asm) and doc the
current behavior as well as the upcoming change.
Warnings would be good.
My warning still holds: there are modes of compilation on some
machines where you can't clobber all registers without causing reload
failures. This is why Jeff didn't fix this in 1999. So, if we really
do want to clobber "all" registers in basic asm it'll take a lot of
work.
Exactly. In retrospect, I probably should have generated more tests for
those conditions back in '99. Essentially they'd document a class of
problems we'd like to fix over time.
I know some have been addressed in various forms, but it hasn't been
systematic.
My recommendation here is to:
1. Note in the docs what the behaviour should be. This guides where
we want to go from an implementation standpoint. I think it'd be fine
to *suggest* only using old style asms at the toplevel, but I'm less
convinced that mandating that restriction is wise.
2. As we come across failures for adhere to the desired behaviour,
fix or document them as known inconsistencies. If we find that some
are inherently un-fixable, then we'll need to tighten the docs around
those.
The more I think about it, I'm just not keen on forcing all those
old-style asms to change.
jeff
