Hello Paul! When I read this once upon during the summer I saw that the problems I once had reported was solved and it was great news. Really thankful that you did so much work with this!
However I know tried to turn on optimizations and then it fails in a strange way. If you have some spare time maybe you could check why it fails on when 11/10 but not when set to 11/40. And it only fails for even powers of two above 16. It is the if that fails so if I remove that one it works. The bug report is https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88435 /Mattis Den lör 14 juli 2018 kl 19:51 skrev Paul Koning via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org>: > > > > On Jul 14, 2018, at 9:46 AM, David Bridgham via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > Hey, glad to hear of some improvement on GCC for the PDP-11. Last > > spring I ended up side-tracked on the QSIC project and working more on > > FPGA issues than writing PDP-11 code but that's going to change here at > > some point. I still want to put a soft PDP-11 into the FPGA as an I/O > > controller and will need to be writing code for it. > > > > For the moment, I'm off at my summer job in Alaska but when I get home > > this fall, it's back to working away on the QSIC and maybe my PDP-10 > > project where I'm thinking I may also use a soft PDP-11 as an I/O > > processor. Anyway, I'll grab up the new GCC and see if my issues with > > the 'volatile' keyword are still there. > > I didn't directly address anything like that, but it may well be that > things are better. "Volatile" is a very tricky area. There is detailed > discussion in the GCC manual about when volatile objects are accessed. You > may want to review that. Sometimes the rules are not precisely what you > might expect. > > paul > >