--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-30
14:04 ---
*** Bug 24146 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-02 07:15
---
Good point. You've got to indicate that you touch memory in some way in order
to force the compiler to make memory consistent before the asm.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-12
10:37 ---
Is an asm a pointer escape point even if it does not have a memory clobber
constraint?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19341
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|2005-01-12 05:41:12 |2005-01-
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-12 05:41
---
.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Re
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-12 05:41
---
Not invalid. The asm is a pointer escape point.
--
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-09
01:54 ---
Another way to fix this is to add that this inline-asm clobers memory, aka:
asm volatile ("call g" :: "a" (&k):"memory");
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19341
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-09
01:37 ---
This code is invalid, for one you should not do a call in inline-asm.
Second the store to k is dead as the inline-asm is not told that k is accessed.
asm volatile ("call g" :: "a" (&k), "m" (k)); will fix t
