On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is the best I could come up with: assuming gcc is not allowed to
> reason about what's inside the asm(), this is the only way I could
> think of to lose the array information without incurring unnecessary
> overheads. It should also be relatively safe as there is no way to
> accidentally use the underlying arrays without explicitly declaring
> them.
Ugh. I worry about the other places where we do things like this,
depending on the linker just assigning the addresses and us being able
to compare them.
If there is a compiler option to disable this optimization, I would
almost prefer that.. Because we really do have a whole slew of these
things.
Linus
