Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>