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. Thanks. Alexander