https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21874
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #11) > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10) > > > > In the case of "fs:gs:[eax]", you can replace it with > > > > "fs:[eax]" to get the same output. > > > > > > In straight line code yes. But what if a first override is hidden deep in > > > a > > > macro you can't or don't want to modify, but you need to add an override > > > to > > > in one special case? > > > > Do you have a real example? > > No, I don't. But I don't assume you have a real example of someone having > used something like fs:foo:[ebx] either, to support your original change. > The reporter's example, as he states, did not result in bad code being > generated (and for that case accepting the code was the intended behavior). Someone bothered enough to open a bug report with a testcase. That is good enough for me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
