Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 23:38:58 +0400 From: "Yuriy Tsibizov" <Yuriy.Tsibizov@gfk.ru> To: <kabaev@gmail.com>, <Yuriy.Tsibizov@gfk.ru> Cc: freebsd@unixfreunde.de, ed@fxq.nl, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Regression] snd_emu10k1 doesn't work after GCC 4.2 upgrade Message-ID: <009301c79fcd$e3040060$1e00000a@hhp.local>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexander, I'm working on it. The only thing I can say right now, that it's -ftree-vrp that broke the = code -- building with -O -ftree-vrp makes broken binary, while -O alone = does not.=20 (sorry for top-posting) -----Original Message----- From: "Alexander Kabaev"<kabaev@gmail.com> Sent: 26.05.07 21:58:38 To: "Yuriy Tsibizov"<Yuriy.Tsibizov@gfk.ru> Cc: "ed@fxq.nl"<ed@fxq.nl>, "current@freebsd.org"<current@freebsd.org>, = "freebsd@unixfreunde.de"<freebsd@unixfreunde.de> Subject: Re: [Regression] snd_emu10k1 doesn't work after GCC 4.2 upgrade On Sat, 26 May 2007 21:45:10 +0400 "Yuriy Tsibizov" <Yuriy.Tsibizov@gfk.ru> wrote: > I've re-checked this problem today and it seems to be a real gcc > regression. I had more pessimistic optimisation flags ( -O ) in my > first tests and snd_emu10k1 was running without problems. If I build > it with -O2 (default value for -CURRENT, with __MAKE_CONF=3D/dev/null) > it is broken (I checked it on my Audigy card and it shows different > problems from Live!, because it uses different code paths in driver). > snd_emu10kx is not broken with both -O and -O2. I can't tell for > shure, but there was no bug reports about broken snd_emu10k1 with -O2 > and old gcc. >=20 > Yuriy >=20 Show me the broken code. It is not that hard to isolate one if you know that it exists. Above rambling does not cut it. --=20 Alexander Kabaev
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?009301c79fcd$e3040060$1e00000a>