[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <186a62fc-042c-d6ab-e7dc-e61b18945498@csgroup.eu>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:13:42 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: remove the last set_fs() in common code, and remove it for x86
and powerpc v3
Le 10/09/2020 à 10:04, David Laight a écrit :
> From: Linus Torvalds
>> Sent: 09 September 2020 22:34
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 11:42 AM Segher Boessenkool
>> <segher@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> It will not work like this in GCC, no. The LLVM people know about that.
>>> I do not know why they insist on pushing this, being incompatible and
>>> everything.
>>
>> Umm. Since they'd be the ones supporting this, *gcc* would be the
>> incompatible one, not clang.
>
> I had an 'interesting' idea.
>
> Can you use a local asm register variable as an input and output to
> an 'asm volatile goto' statement?
>
> Well you can - but is it guaranteed to work :-)
>
With gcc at least it should work according to
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Local-Register-Variables.html
They even explicitely tell: "The only supported use for this feature is
to specify registers for input and output operands when calling Extended
asm "
Christophe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists