On 06/10/16 20:42, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> The second testcase FAILs on both x86_64 and i686, because it contains
> no dg-options, therefore is compiled with -ansi -pedantic and that doesn't
> allow GNU inline asm syntax. While looking at the testcase, I believe you
> meant to make it executable,
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 03:10:44PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/29/2016 08:37 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >gcc:
> >2016-05-22 Bernd Edlinger
> >
> > PR inline-asm/68843
> > * reg-stack.c (check_asm_stack_operands): Explicit input arguments
> > must be grouped on top of s
On 05/29/2016 08:37 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
gcc:
2016-05-22 Bernd Edlinger
PR inline-asm/68843
* reg-stack.c (check_asm_stack_operands): Explicit input arguments
must be grouped on top of stack. Don't force early clobber
on ordinary reg outputs.
testsuit
Hi,
ping for the RTL optimization stuff.
The problem here is that the code in reg-stack.c
pretty much everywhere assumes that the stack registers
do not have gaps. IMHO it is not worth to fix the
register allocation in a way that would be necessary for that
configuration to work correctly.
So t
