From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Nov 2 8:33:29 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mail.wgate.com (mail.wgate.com [38.219.83.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8ADE37B4C5; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 08:33:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from jesup.eng.tvol.net ([10.32.2.26]) by mail.wgate.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id VT2YBZVZ; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 11:33:24 -0500 Reply-To: Randell Jesup To: Gerald Pfeifer Cc: , Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group , "David O'Brien" Subject: Re: "Malloc type lacks magic" show-stopper solved References: From: Randell Jesup Date: 02 Nov 2000 11:37:09 -0500 In-Reply-To: Gerald Pfeifer's message of "Thu, 2 Nov 2000 12:54:23 +0100 (CET)" Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Gerald Pfeifer writes: >David O'Brien wrote: >> Forgot to mention. I'm considering removing the ability to do -O2 and >> -O3 from the system C compiler again.... people are just proving over >> and over how much they want to shoot their foot off. > >Please don't. We are already seeing enough problems due to differences >between FSF GCC and FreeBSD's patched version. Please let's reduce those >differences, not introduce anything further. Removing -O2 and -O3 from userland would be a Very Bad Thing, and would cause us considerable consternation. Proper use of -O2, -O3, and various -f's and -m's can get us 10's of % on some heavily compute-bound code. This translates to considerable differences in $$$ in hardware. >Besides, -O2 and -O3 are perfectly legitimate options for user code, and >I really don't see why one shouldn't use the system compiler for that as >well but install another one. Absolutely. >Finally, I do agree about -O3, but -O2 *should* definitely work for the >kernel. If it does not, this is a bug, either in GCC or FreeBSD, and ought >to be tracked down and, in the former case, at least be reported to the >GCC folks. -O2 should work. I've never seen a bug with -O2 code generation from GCC (not that they can't happen, of course). Most bugs I've seen in my career with optimization levels were actually timing holes in the source code, where someone was accessing a shared resource and counting on ordering/etc, or bugs with accessing hardware registers where structures weren't properly marked volatile. If there's a problem, find it and report it. IMHO. -- Randell Jesup, Worldgate Communications, ex-Scala, ex-Amiga OS team ('88-94) rjesup@wgate.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message