Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 01:41:09 +0300 From: "Maxim Sobolev" <sobomax@mail.ru> To: "Dan Nelson" <dnelson@emsphone.com> Cc: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re[2]: gcc -Os optimisation broken (RELENG_4) Message-ID: <E12VMTV-000E5w-00@f4.mail.ru> In-Reply-To: <20000315155727.B44262@dan.emsphone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----Original Message----- From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 15:57:27 -0600 Subject: Re: gcc -Os optimisation broken (RELENG_4) > In the last episode (Mar 15), David O'Brien said: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 10:51:55AM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote: > > > I get it with -O2 (-Os implies -O2, so it's probably the same > > > problem). > > > > Not quite. -0s ==> all the -O2 optimizations that do not increase > > code size. -Os can also perform other optimizations not part of -O2 > > that decrease code size. The -Os ==> -O2 only tells you how "risky" > > in optimizing -Os is willing to be. > > Too risky, apparently :) > > Maxim: It looks like you've done quite a big of debugging already; can > you get this bug to appear in a small piece of code? I'm sure the gcc > developers would be able to fix the problem pretty quickly if it's > easily reproducable. I'll try to. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E12VMTV-000E5w-00>