Thanks for all the input. I will do some more investigating myself and hopefully produce a small test case as well as try to track down the actual commits to gcc which caused it. Unfortunately I suspect there are multiple causes to blame. I will post back when I have more information. I thought someone might have a guess or know right away what might have caused this.
Thanks, Sean On 5/6/09, Weddington, Eric <eric.wedding...@atmel.com> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: >> avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu.org >> [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu. >> org] On Behalf Of Sean D'Epagnier >> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:45 PM >> To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org >> Subject: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0 >> >> Hi, >> >> I was trying to reduce the size of my binary so it would fit on some >> 128kb parts. I normally used gcc 4.2.2 for this project, but decided >> to try gcc 4.5.0. To my surprise, the resulting binary was 3.5kb >> _larger_ with the newer gcc. This is a serious bug imho and should be >> fixed. I'm not quite sure why it did occur, but I have some guesses. >> I have here the old (4.2.2 gcc) then the new (4.5.0 gcc) disassembly: > > The first step is to fill out a bug report at the GCC project. Let me know > the bug number so I can track it. > > Next, it needs to be determined which version caused the biggest problem. > 4.2.x? 4.3.x? 4.4.0? Or HEAD/4.5? It could just get progressively worse with > each version, or perhaps there is some big jump in code size. > _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
