Hi, Anyone is free to modify the files to their heart's content, the issue that would arise with this suggestion is that it would add increased complexity in the SCons script. I recently had some issues with a newer version a gcc breaking another project I was working on and because of this I'd prefer not to have to do checks for various versions.
I would be open to looking into this if we were provided either a patch or pull request from github. While I want to make MARSS the best architectural simulator available, I only have so much free time. Brendan On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Vidyabhushan Mohan <[email protected]>wrote: > I ran some more debugging sessions and found that using -O0 is painfully > slow (atleast twice slower compared to O1). I think which should keep both > the options with the default being -O (as it is currently). > On a similar note, GCC 4.8 has introduced -Og for superior debugging > experience. (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/changes.html). Anyone have an > idea of how good it is. If it's good, then we could modify the script to > check for gcc version and use -Og if we use gcc 4.8 or higher. > > - Bhushan > > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Stephan Diestelhorst < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Vidyabhushan Mohan wrote on Wednesday 30 January 2013, 17:39:47: >> > Hi, >> > I have been using Marss to simulate parsec/spec workloads and so far >> things >> > have been great. I was debugging one of my simulation runs in debug mode >> > (scons debug=1 core=8) but I found out that most of the local variables >> and >> > some of the function arguments were optimized out and I had to resort to >> > debugging the assembly. When I checked the script in ptlsim/SConstruct, >> I >> > see this piece of code (lines 33-38): >> > >> > >> > if int(debug): >> > env.Append(CCFLAGS = '-g') >> > >> > # If debugging level is 1 then do optimize >> > >> > if int(debug) == 1: >> > env.Append(CCFLAGS = '-O') >> > >> > >> > Was it intentional to *enable* optimization when debug =1 is specified? >> > Since I do not want any optimizations enabled in the *debug* build, I >> could >> > sidestep this by specifying, for example debug =2. But I still wanted to >> > confirm if enabling optimization (for debug=1) was intentional. If not, >> > perhaps we could change it to -O0. >> >> Personally I find that -O0 code is a pain to look at, but I do rely on >> the assertions and extra printouts. Furthermore, I am almost always >> looking at the assembly directly... >> >> So maybe having both options (explicitly) would be good? >> >> Stephan >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.marss86.org > Marss86-Devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.cs.binghamton.edu/mailman/listinfo/marss86-devel > >
_______________________________________________ http://www.marss86.org Marss86-Devel mailing list [email protected] https://www.cs.binghamton.edu/mailman/listinfo/marss86-devel
