On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 10:53:08AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote: >> These mrs_s and msr_s macros in particular were preventing us from >> linking arm64 with Clang's integrated assembler, regardless of LTO. >> Those macros ran into: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19749. >> So while I appreciate how clever they are, they prevent us from >> assembling with Clang so I would like to see them go. > > They're necessary to work with some currently-supported toolchains > (which don't support the s*_*_c*_c*_* syntax), so they're not going to > go completely. > > If you could suggest something that clang might prefer, which doesn't > adversely affect GCC, I'm all ears.
I wasn't clear in my point; I recognize what they do and agree that they are needed. More specifically, my problem is the use of .macro assembly directives, since Clang "considers it a feature" not to let you invoke a .macro defined in one inline asm block from another asm inline block. So I would like to see *the use of .macro in separate inline asm blocks within mrs_s and msr_s c-preprocessor macros go.*
