On Fri, 12 Oct 2018, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > Please consider that as currently GCC over-estimates length of such asms, > > branches around them are emitted as long-range jumps more often than needed, > > which should be a problem we'd want to solve, because the whole reason this > > is being raised is because such asms appear in hot code paths. My proposal > > solves this aspect as well. > > The compiler estimates the size of an asm for very different purposes than > for making inlining decisions. It is pretty good for those other purposes, > but not great for inlining decisions. Your proposal makes it not good for > *either*, has a handwavy definition that is hard to reason with, and has > other problems integrating with the existing GCC code as well.
No, I'm pretty sure that's an unfair assessment of my idea. Can I ask someone to step in? Alexander
