[Bug target/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

2021-12-31 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug target/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

2021-12-31 Thread pskocik at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 Petr Skocik changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pskocik at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 fr

[Bug target/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

2018-05-25 Thread ndesaulniers at google dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 --- Comment #4 from Nick Desaulniers --- Thanks for the clarification.

[Bug target/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

2018-05-25 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I don't see the issue with the ud2 instruction here. The only valid thing is for basic inline-asm statements in the functions which have the naked attribute. It is undefined if using anything besides basic

[Bug target/85927] ud2 instruction generated starting with gcc 8

2018-05-25 Thread ndesaulniers at google dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85927 --- Comment #2 from Nick Desaulniers --- Sorry, probably: __attribute__((naked)) unsigned long save_flags4(void) { asm volatile("pushf; pop %rax;ret;"); } is a better example: : 0: 9c pushfq 1