Hi, On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Michael Matz wrote: > > Sooo, hmm, I don't know ;-) We could try doing a roll backwards and > > demand explicit dependencies from asms with unknown effects on the few > > unknown users, though the timing really makes me nervous. But my gut > > feeling says to remain (or become again) very conservative with global reg > > vars (and document that for real then!). > > What's the problem with the timing? The code change is proposed for stage 1, > only the doc change is intended for gcc-8.1. Sure but even for that we need to decide if we want to go that or the opposite way, and that's not easy when a deadline is lurking behind you. Ciao, Michael.
