Hi Andreas, Did you use any specific version of swig to build under gcc 5.1? I'm testing this but am having problems and I figure it's due to a version problem. Please let me know if you made changes to build with 5.1. Thanks.
Joe -----Original Message----- From: gem5-dev [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andreas Hansson Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2015 7:41 AM To: Andreas Hansson; Default; Steve Reinhardt Subject: Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2766: misc: Appease gcc 5.1 > On May 8, 2015, 5:07 p.m., Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > Ship It! A minor update. This patch does not affect runtime, but switching from gcc 4.9.1 to 5.1.0 actually slows gem5 down by 4% on average (at least on the two hosts I've run the regressions). The 4% is the increase in the total regression CPU times, but the impact seems to be roughly the same across the board. - Andreas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2766/#review6126 ----------------------------------------------------------- On May 8, 2015, 1:10 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2766/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 8, 2015, 1:10 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 10832:4d7b7d5e972d > --------------------------- > misc: Appease gcc 5.1 > > Three minor issues are resolved: > > 1. Apparently gcc 5.1 does not like negation of booleans followed by > bitwise AND. > > 2. Somehow the compiler also gets confused and warns about > NoopMachInst being unused (removing it causes compilation errors > though). Most likely a compiler bug. > > 3. There seems to be a number of instances where loop unrolling causes > false positives for the array-bounds check. For now, switch to > std::array. Potentially we could disable the warning for newer gcc > versions, but switching to std::array is probably a good move in > any case. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/arch/x86/insts/microop.cc fbdaa08aaa42 > src/arch/x86/isa_traits.hh fbdaa08aaa42 > src/cpu/base_dyn_inst.hh fbdaa08aaa42 > src/cpu/o3/dyn_inst.hh fbdaa08aaa42 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2766/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Hansson > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
