hans added a comment. In D58821#1416212 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D58821#1416212>, @joerg wrote:
> Can you include a patch for something like (int *)0xdeadbeeeeeef on amd64? > That's a valid value for "n", but clearly too large for int. Thanks for > looking at this, it is one of the two large remaining show stoppers for the > asm constraint check. What's the other show stopper? Is that also something that regressed from the previous release since the "n" constraint got stricter? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58821/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58821 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
