From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 15 13:57:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C395837BB57; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 13:57:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA44861; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 15:57:27 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dan) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 15:57:27 -0600 From: Dan Nelson To: "David O'Brien" Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, sobomax@mail.ru Subject: Re: gcc -Os optimisation broken (RELENG_4) Message-ID: <20000315155727.B44262@dan.emsphone.com> References: <38CF48CF.59A100D7@altavista.net> <20000315105155.A9533@dan.emsphone.com> <20000315135205.C60742@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.5i In-Reply-To: <20000315135205.C60742@dragon.nuxi.com>; from "David O'Brien" on Wed Mar 15 13:52:05 GMT 2000 X-OS: FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@emsphone.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message