|Interaction between optimizer and inline asm in gcc? firstname.lastname@example.org (Christopher Brian Colohan) (2002-05-17)|
|Re: Interaction between optimizer and inline asm in gcc? email@example.com (2002-05-23)|
|Re: Interaction between optimizer and inline asm in gcc? firstname.lastname@example.org (2002-05-23)|
|Re: Interaction between optimizer and inline asm in gcc? email@example.com (2002-05-23)|
|Re: Interaction between optimizer and inline asm in gcc? firstname.lastname@example.org (2002-05-23)|
|Date:||23 May 2002 01:50:01 -0400|
|Posted-Date:||23 May 2002 01:50:01 EDT|
When you have inline asm blocks in loops under GCC and specify the
-funroll-loops option then the loop is still unrolled. This was
tested under GCC 2.95.3.
Christopher Brian Colohan <email@example.com> wrote
> I am working on an architecture research project where we are using
> inline assembly instructions to instrument and change the behaviour of
> I was wondering if anyone has looked into the impact of doing this on
> gcc's optimizer: in other words, how conservatively does gcc treat
> inline asm statements? For example, would inserting such a statement
> inhibit loop unrolling?
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.