Odd. I replied to this yesterday, but somehow it wasn't sent. > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 12:35 PM Jose E. Marchesi > <jose.marchesi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> > On 4/26/23 10:37 AM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: >> >> Just a heads up, we just committed support for the assembly syntax >> >> used >> >> by clang to the GNU assembler [1]. >> > >> > Thanks! Do you which gcc release is expected to contain these changes? >> >> This is the assembler, i.e. binutils. >> We don't need to update the compiler. >> >> >> Salud! >> >> [1] https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-April/127222.html > > This is awesome! > We recently converted tens of thousands of lines of bpf asm from macros > to inline asm in C. > See tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_*.c > I wonder how gas-bpf can deal with that. Inline assembly shall work. > We had to fix several inline asm issues in clang to get to this point > and probably more to come. We will give these tests a try and fix problems as we find them :) We actually came with some ambiguities, undefined stuff, and other issues with the syntax while doing the implementation. We hope to discuss some of that during the LSF/MM/BPF next week, so we can consolidate the language in both toolchains. Speaking of which, we are preparing the material for the "compiled BPF" activity during LSF/MM/BPF. I think the BPF track hasn't been scheduled yet, but how much time will we have to discuss about the topic?
