On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:05:01PM +0100, Richard Henderson wrote:
> I'd be perfectly happy to deprecate and later completely remove basic asm
> within functions.
>
> Because IMO it's essentially useless. It has no inputs, no outputs, and no
> way to tell the compiler what machine state has been changed. We can say
> that "it clobbers everything", but that's not actually useful, and quite
> difficult as you're finding out.
>
> It seems to me that it would be better to remove the feature, forcing what
> must be an extremely small number of users to audit and update to extended
> asm.
Should asm("bla"); then be an extended asm with no input, no outputs,
no (non-automatic) clobbers? That would be the most straightforward and
logical semantics, but will it break user code?
Segher
