Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
Hi Eric, I have re-investigated PR21990 today and observed that it no longer appears in mainline. It is also absent in today's cvs state of the 4.0 branch. Dunno whether the original problem has been fixed or whether something else has changed such that the bug is no longer exposed. Unfortunately, we probably could not exclude completely the possibility that there is still a latent bug: Since the register allocator in the recent versions seems to be smarter than it used to be, the test case function that had a clobbered frame pointer in the past no longer needs any frame pointer. So this function could no longer expose the bug. Since I have now been working for quite a while without seeing any serious problem with 4.0, I'd like to withdraw my serious objections that I had had against it after having observed PR21990. Yours, Björn E. Weddington wrote on Freitag, 19. August 2005 06:55 : Denis Chertykov wrote: E. Weddington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Personally I would still hesitate to use it in any type of production environment because of these two GCC bugs: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21990 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21107 Bug #21990 is a wrong code type bug and was submitted by Björn Haase. He stated in the beginning: I have observed a wrong code bug that I judge to be so serious that IMHO one should discourage use of the avr port for 4.x.x until it is resolved. I can't reproduce this bug with current mainline. Denis. Hi Denis, Thanks for taking a look at this. Did you happen to leave a comment in the bug report saying that you couldn't reproduce this bug in the current mainline? If you didn't, could you please do this? That way it's still tracked. Thanks Eric Weddington ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
E. Weddington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Andy Warner wrote: E. Weddington wrote: [...] I'd like some other issues in GCC 4.x to be cleaned up for the AVR port before including it in WinAVR, especially DWARF2 issues. Here is a list of known AVR GCC bugs: http://rtems.org/phpwiki/index.php/GCCAVRBugs As a Linux-hosted user, is 4.0.1 stable enough for me to spend some time getting to know it ? I'm running 3.4.3 right now, and am very happy with it - but smaller/faster code is always welcome. I'm cool building it all from source. Personally I would still hesitate to use it in any type of production environment because of these two GCC bugs: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21990 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21107 Bug #21990 is a wrong code type bug and was submitted by Björn Haase. He stated in the beginning: I have observed a wrong code bug that I judge to be so serious that IMHO one should discourage use of the avr port for 4.x.x until it is resolved. I can't reproduce this bug with current mainline. Denis. ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
Denis Chertykov wrote: E. Weddington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Personally I would still hesitate to use it in any type of production environment because of these two GCC bugs: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21990 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21107 Bug #21990 is a wrong code type bug and was submitted by Björn Haase. He stated in the beginning: I have observed a wrong code bug that I judge to be so serious that IMHO one should discourage use of the avr port for 4.x.x until it is resolved. I can't reproduce this bug with current mainline. Denis. Hi Denis, Thanks for taking a look at this. Did you happen to leave a comment in the bug report saying that you couldn't reproduce this bug in the current mainline? If you didn't, could you please do this? That way it's still tracked. Thanks Eric Weddington ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
RE: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
Would it be possible for the Mega329 to be officially included in the next WinAVR release? Ron I'd like some other issues in GCC 4.x to be cleaned up for the AVR port before including it in WinAVR, especially DWARF2 issues. Here is a list of known AVR GCC bugs: http://rtems.org/phpwiki/index.php/GCCAVRBugs (Note that the list does need a little updating (not a lot) which will happen soon). ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
Ron wrote: Would it be possible for the Mega329 to be officially included in the next WinAVR release? If there are patches for it in the avr-libc Patch Manager, then they will be included. Eric ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
Gaël Rossignol wrote: Where can I find avr-gcc 4.0.2 windows version if it hasen't been realeased yet?? Please respond to the list and not just to me personally. Thanks. Well, that's the joke: you can't. Unless, of course, you build it yourself. The next WinAVR release will be built with GCC 3.4.4. My best guess, right now, is that the release *after that* will probably start including GCC from the 4.0.x series. But I would still like some AVR specific bugs to be worked out in the 4.0.x series before including it. Again, this is just a guess. Right now, the projected time frame for the next WinAVR release will be late August or early September. But this time frame can change without notice. Eric ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
[avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
When I built gcc for AVR I wasn't sure what the Right version of GCC to use was. I've been using a cross-compiling GCC 3.4.4 for another platform with success so I went with that. However, even with -morder1 and -fnew-ra, the code is not nearly as good as 4.0.1 for AVR. My main test file .o text (at the moment mostly poking bits and doing integer math) got 12% shorter with -Os (due in no small part to the fact that it's smarter with registers, resulting in less spilling, resulting in no need for the prolog/eplilog callouts). Of course I've got nearly zero experience with both, so I welcome dissenting opinions, but I wanted to put the recommendation out there for any other newbies. -- Ben Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ben.com/ ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
Ben Jackson wrote: When I built gcc for AVR I wasn't sure what the Right version of GCC to use was. I've been using a cross-compiling GCC 3.4.4 for another platform with success so I went with that. However, even with -morder1 and -fnew-ra, the code is not nearly as good as 4.0.1 for AVR. My main test file .o text (at the moment mostly poking bits and doing integer math) got 12% shorter with -Os (due in no small part to the fact that it's smarter with registers, resulting in less spilling, resulting in no need for the prolog/eplilog callouts). Of course I've got nearly zero experience with both, so I welcome dissenting opinions, but I wanted to put the recommendation out there for any other newbies. For Windows users, don't use 4.0.1, use 4.0.2. Which hasn't been released yet. There are other problems with the 4.x series mainly having to do with DWARF2 debugging information, that only got fixed within the last day or so. These fixes won't be available until 4.0.2 or 4.1, neither of which has been released yet. DWARF2 debugging information is needed if you are planning on running any simulations in Atmel's AVR Studio. Having said that, yes, the 4.x series looks like it will generate better AVR code mainly due in large part to work from Björn Haase (Danke!), directly or indirectly. I'd like some other issues in GCC 4.x to be cleaned up for the AVR port before including it in WinAVR, especially DWARF2 issues. Here is a list of known AVR GCC bugs: http://rtems.org/phpwiki/index.php/GCCAVRBugs (Note that the list does need a little updating (not a lot) which will happen soon). ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
E. Weddington wrote: [...] I'd like some other issues in GCC 4.x to be cleaned up for the AVR port before including it in WinAVR, especially DWARF2 issues. Here is a list of known AVR GCC bugs: http://rtems.org/phpwiki/index.php/GCCAVRBugs As a Linux-hosted user, is 4.0.1 stable enough for me to spend some time getting to know it ? I'm running 3.4.3 right now, and am very happy with it - but smaller/faster code is always welcome. I'm cool building it all from source. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Andy Warner Voice: (612) 801-8549 Fax: (208) 575-5634 ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
Andy Warner wrote: E. Weddington wrote: [...] I'd like some other issues in GCC 4.x to be cleaned up for the AVR port before including it in WinAVR, especially DWARF2 issues. Here is a list of known AVR GCC bugs: http://rtems.org/phpwiki/index.php/GCCAVRBugs As a Linux-hosted user, is 4.0.1 stable enough for me to spend some time getting to know it ? I'm running 3.4.3 right now, and am very happy with it - but smaller/faster code is always welcome. I'm cool building it all from source. Personally I would still hesitate to use it in any type of production environment because of these two GCC bugs: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21990 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21107 Bug #21990 is a wrong code type bug and was submitted by Björn Haase. He stated in the beginning: I have observed a wrong code bug that I judge to be so serious that IMHO one should discourage use of the avr port for 4.x.x until it is resolved. Bug #21107 is an ICE on valid bug submitted by Martin Kögler and is a regression for 4.0/4.1. Neither of these two bugs have been fixed yet. IMHO. YMMV. Eric Weddington ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
