On 01.08.2003 05:00, Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 10:30:57PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
[...]
problem of compiling the system with cc -O2 resulting in a buggy kernel.
If you determine that compiling with cc -O -fgcse results in failures,
[...]
There is an open bug report in
Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 03:52:25PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
[ ... ]
That wasn't my real point anyway. I was trying to refute your statement
that Even if the code contains a bug, cc -O and cc -O -fgcse
should produce the same results.
I claim that if the code has a bug that
Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 10:30:57PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
[ ... ]
I understand that figuring out why the kernel died can be hard,
particularly if the failures aren't concise and completely reproducable,
and thus tracing the problem back to making the right change to gcc
Kris Kennaway wrote:
[ ... ]
This is the trivial part (you don't even need to modify gcc, because
all the optimizations turned on by -Ofoo are also available as
individual -fblah options).
Indeed. If you've forgotten, I quoted the section of the gcc source code which
indicates which individual
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 12:19:06PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 10:30:57PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
[ ... ]
I understand that figuring out why the kernel died can be hard,
particularly if the failures aren't concise and completely reproducable,
Erik Trulsson wrote:
[ ... ]
A somewhat contrived example that behaves differently when compiled
with -O3 or when compiled with -O2 or lower optimization follows:
static int f(int a)
{
return a/0;
}
int main(void)
{
int x;
x = f(5);
return 0;
}
Contrived, but
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 03:52:25PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Erik Trulsson wrote:
[ ... ]
A somewhat contrived example that behaves differently when compiled
with -O3 or when compiled with -O2 or lower optimization follows:
static int f(int a)
{
return a/0;
}
int main(void)
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi, all--
The known bugs section of the GCC info documentation lists 5 issues;
man gcc lists none.
You are looking in the 'wrong' place for 'known bugs' (Or the GCC
people aren't putting the info in the 'right' place :-)
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 05:37:45PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Hi, all--
The known bugs section of the GCC info documentation lists 5 issues; man
gcc lists none. Can someone provide a test case for a bug involving cc
-O versus cc -O3 under FreeBSD 4-STABLE for the x86 architecture?
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 05:37:45PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
The known bugs section of the GCC info documentation lists 5 issues; man
gcc lists none. Can someone provide a test case for a bug involving cc
-O versus cc -O3 under FreeBSD 4-STABLE for the x86 architecture?
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:34:17PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
OK. Can the existence of such problems be confirmed reliably, say by
regression testing?
The problem is in identifying precisely which piece of code is
failing. A regression test is only useful if it concisely exercises a
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:34:17PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
OK. Can the existence of such problems be confirmed reliably, say by
regression testing?
The problem is in identifying precisely which piece of code is
failing. A regression test is only useful if it concisely
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 10:30:57PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:34:17PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
OK. Can the existence of such problems be confirmed reliably, say by
regression testing?
The problem is in identifying precisely which piece of
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 10:30:57PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Fine. However, you don't _need_ to identify the reason why the kernel
died, or solve the bug in global common expression elimination to solve the
problem of compiling the system with cc -O2 resulting in a buggy kernel.
If you
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi, all--
The known bugs section of the GCC info documentation lists 5 issues;
man gcc lists none. Can someone provide a test case for a bug
involving cc -O versus cc -O3 under FreeBSD 4-STABLE for the x86
architecture?
You could probably find a few
15 matches
Mail list logo
