From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Dec 11 06:38:14 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D0A616A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 06:38:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from paladin.fortunaty.net (fortunaty.net [217.160.129.175])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 23F8143D1D
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 06:38:13 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from ah@paladin.fortunaty.net)
Received: (qmail 3191 invoked by uid 501); 11 Dec 2003 14:38:12 -0000
Date: 11 Dec 2003 14:38:12 -0000
Message-ID: <20031211143812.3190.qmail@paladin.fortunaty.net>
User-Agent: Emai/0.0.2p1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20031211132010.2491.qmail@paladin.fortunaty.net>,<xzpbrqfij0r.fsf@dwp.des.no>
In-Reply-To: <xzpbrqfij0r.fsf@dwp.des.no>
From: Andreas Hauser <andy-freebsd@splashground.de>
To: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
cc: Damian Gerow <dgerow@afflictions.org>
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: buildworld doesn't like -O2
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:38:14 -0000

des wrote @ Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:25:08 +0100:
> andy@splashground.de writes:
> > And in this case, as far as i can see, the code does violate the
> > strict aliasing rules.
> 
> Yes, and you are welcome to send a patch, but there was none in the
> PR.  PRs consisting of nothing but a compiler error message are worse
> than useless.

I see. It just wasn't clear to me from your comment in the PR
wether you considered the code to be a problem at all.

Do you prefer the union version, then please see Andreas Jäger's patch,
or my local version with more varibles and casts, it's rather untested,
or just -fno-strict-aliasing for the offending code parts
or a combination of all of these?


Andy