On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 16:18 -0500, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 09:28 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
What's the rationale behind having -fno-strict-aliasing in CWARNFLAGS?
Do we actually have code somewhere that needs -fno-strict-aliasing? If so,
we should restrict
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 10:15 +, Colin Harrison wrote:
Michel Dänzer wrote:
Traditionally, -fno-strict-aliasing was definitely necessary for the X
server and/or some drivers to work correctly.
Strict aliasing used to be a can'o worms...
http://lkml.org/lkml/2003/2/26/158
and
2010/2/3 Michel Dänzer mic...@daenzer.net:
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 16:18 -0500, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 09:28 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
What's the rationale behind having -fno-strict-aliasing in CWARNFLAGS?
Do we actually have code somewhere that needs
2010/2/3 Michel Dänzer mic...@daenzer.net:
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 10:15 +, Colin Harrison wrote:
Michel Dänzer wrote:
Traditionally, -fno-strict-aliasing was definitely necessary for the X
server and/or some drivers to work correctly.
Strict aliasing used to be a can'o worms...
Ok.
In light of the discussion here, I think it would be best to take
Gaetan's option 3 here:
1) We should turn -fno-strict-aliasing on in the 9 (note that this
number does not include xf86 drivers) modules that traditionally had it:
libICE
libSM
libX11
libXau
libXfont
libXft
libXpm
On 2010-02-03 15:02, Michael Cree wrote:
On 04/02/10 07:55, Soeren Sandmann wrote:
I recently turned it on in pixman because completely reasonable code
like this:
void
pixman_contract (uint32_t * dst,
const uint64_t *src,
int
On 04/02/10 09:17, Peter Harris wrote:
On 2010-02-03 15:02, Michael Cree wrote:
On 04/02/10 07:55, Soeren Sandmann wrote:
I recently turned it on in pixman because completely reasonable code
like this:
void
pixman_contract (uint32_t * dst,
const
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 11:35 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
Ok.
In light of the discussion here, I think it would be best to take
Gaetan's option 3 here:
1) We should turn -fno-strict-aliasing on in the 9 (note that this
number does not include xf86 drivers) modules that
Michael Cree mc...@orcon.net.nz writes:
What I do see is that the variables a, r, g and b are essentially
declared unsigned char (what I presume uint8_t is typedefed to) and a
calculation is performed that will lose its intended result due to
shifting an unsigned char more bits to the left
On 04/02/10 14:28, Soeren Sandmann wrote:
Michael Creemc...@orcon.net.nz writes:
What I do see is that the variables a, r, g and b are essentially
declared unsigned char (what I presume uint8_t is typedefed to) and a
calculation is performed that will lose its intended result due to
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 09:28 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
What's the rationale behind having -fno-strict-aliasing in CWARNFLAGS?
Do we actually have code somewhere that needs -fno-strict-aliasing? If so,
we should restrict -fno-strict-aliasing to that project (and try to address
the
On Feb 2, 2010, at 13:18, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
I have not seen any compelling reasons to turn off this optimization.
Maybe 10 years ago when it was first introduced. I have seen reports of
large number of warnings, but from older gcc versions. As it is today,
we are losing some optimization
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 14:00 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
On Feb 2, 2010, at 13:18, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
I have not seen any compelling reasons to turn off this optimization.
Maybe 10 years ago when it was first introduced. I have seen reports of
large number of warnings, but from older
On Feb 2, 2010, at 17:11, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 14:00 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
On Feb 2, 2010, at 13:18, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
I have not seen any compelling reasons to turn off this optimization.
Maybe 10 years ago when it was first introduced. I have seen
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 17:34 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
On Feb 2, 2010, at 17:11, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 14:00 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
On Feb 2, 2010, at 13:18, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
I have not seen any compelling reasons to turn off this optimization.
15 matches
Mail list logo
