On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 08:58:36PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Bernd Walter wrote:
>
> > I'm always compiling -current on alpha and i386 with -O2 since months.
> > I havn't noticed any compiler related problems lately.
>
> How do you know?
It's not that I don't know about thi
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Bernd Walter wrote:
> I'm always compiling -current on alpha and i386 with -O2 since months.
> I havn't noticed any compiler related problems lately.
How do you know?
--
"The last time France wanted more evidence, it rolled right
through Paris with a German fla
Marcin Dalecki wrote:
> David Schultz wrote:
> > Strangely, gcc in FreeBSD 5.0 actually generates *slower* code
> > when compiling for more recent architectures than when compiling
> > for a 386. I don't know whether that is a bug in gcc or whether
> > gcc is using some fancy feature like SSE that
David Schultz wrote:
Thus spake Marcin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
David Schultz wrote:
Strangely, gcc in FreeBSD 5.0 actually generates *slower* code
when compiling for more recent architectures than when compiling
for a 386. I don't know whether that is a bug in gcc or whether
gcc is usin
On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 04:25:42PM -0800, David Schultz wrote:
> Yes, the possibility of being bitten by compiler bugs is certainly
> higher with higher optimization levels. Alpha with -O2 seems to
> have been broken for years, and I have seen strange things happen
> on IA64 as well. But the i386
On Sun, Feb 09, 2003, David Schultz wrote:
> > Yet squid under i386 freebsd is .. well, finds -O bugs in gcc.
> > We gave up trying -O under FreeBSD a long time ago. :-)
>
> The last time someone told me, ``gcc -O is broken'', it turned out
> that they were doing some stack fiddling, and gcc's op
Thus spake Marcin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> David Schultz wrote:
>
> >Strangely, gcc in FreeBSD 5.0 actually generates *slower* code
> >when compiling for more recent architectures than when compiling
> >for a 386. I don't know whether that is a bug in gcc or whether
> >gcc is using some fan
David Schultz wrote:
Strangely, gcc in FreeBSD 5.0 actually generates *slower* code
when compiling for more recent architectures than when compiling
for a 386. I don't know whether that is a bug in gcc or whether
gcc is using some fancy feature like SSE that the kernel handles
poorly on context
Thus spake Adrian Chadd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2003, David Schultz wrote:
>
> > Yes, the possibility of being bitten by compiler bugs is certainly
> > higher with higher optimization levels. Alpha with -O2 seems to
> > have been broken for years, and I have seen strange things hap
"Jacques A. Vidrine" wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 05:23:01PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > The compiler
> > didn't complain when he checked it before committing it because
> > optimization was off by default; it should have complained, e.g.:
>
> Is that really what you meant?
On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 03:17:12PM +0100, Erik Trulsson wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 08:03:57AM -0600, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 05:23:01PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > The compiler
> > > didn't complain when he checked it before committing it because
> > > opti
On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 08:03:57AM -0600, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 05:23:01PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > The compiler
> > didn't complain when he checked it before committing it because
> > optimization was off by default; it should have complained, e.g.:
> ^^^
On Sat, Feb 08, 2003, David Schultz wrote:
> Yes, the possibility of being bitten by compiler bugs is certainly
> higher with higher optimization levels. Alpha with -O2 seems to
> have been broken for years, and I have seen strange things happen
> on IA64 as well. But the i386 code generators ha
On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 05:23:01PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> The compiler
> didn't complain when he checked it before committing it because
> optimization was off by default; it should have complained, e.g.:
Is that really what you meant? I don't believe it has anything to
do wi
On 09-Feb-2003 Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Feb 08), Conrad Sabatier said:
>> Call me a fool, but I've been using this for quite some time now, in both
>> -stable (well, with slight modifications) and -current:
>>
>> CPUTYPE?=k7
>>
>> CFLAGS= -O2 -pipe -mmmx -m3dnow -fforce-mem -fforc
In the last episode (Feb 08), Conrad Sabatier said:
> Call me a fool, but I've been using this for quite some time now, in both
> -stable (well, with slight modifications) and -current:
>
> CPUTYPE?=k7
>
> CFLAGS= -O2 -pipe -mmmx -m3dnow -fforce-mem -fforce-addr -fstrength-reduce \
> -fthread-jump
On 08-Feb-2003 Ray Kohler wrote:
> Has anyone tried building world/kernel with high optimizations (-O2,
> -O3) recently? What breaks? (Booby prize to whoever says "common sense"
> ;) I last tried it quite a few months ago and the resolver died on me,
> don't know what else. I'm not really thinking
Thus spake Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> David Schultz wrote:
> > Thus spake Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > Actually, failure to use optimization suppresses some compilation
> > > warnings, particularly those which normally print from using some
> > > variables without initializing
David Schultz wrote:
> Thus spake Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Actually, failure to use optimization suppresses some compilation
> > warnings, particularly those which normally print from using some
> > variables without initializing them.
>
> I think you're thinking of dataflow analysis
Thus spake Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> David Schultz wrote:
> > Thus spake Ray Kohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > Has anyone tried building world/kernel with high optimizations (-O2,
> > > -O3) recently? What breaks? (Booby prize to whoever says "common sense"
> > > ;) I last tried it quite
David Schultz wrote:
> Thus spake Ray Kohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Has anyone tried building world/kernel with high optimizations (-O2,
> > -O3) recently? What breaks? (Booby prize to whoever says "common sense"
> > ;) I last tried it quite a few months ago and the resolver died on me,
> > don't
Thus spake Ray Kohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Has anyone tried building world/kernel with high optimizations (-O2,
> -O3) recently? What breaks? (Booby prize to whoever says "common sense"
> ;) I last tried it quite a few months ago and the resolver died on me,
> don't know what else. I'm not really
Has anyone tried building world/kernel with high optimizations (-O2,
-O3) recently? What breaks? (Booby prize to whoever says "common sense"
;) I last tried it quite a few months ago and the resolver died on me,
don't know what else. I'm not really thinking of running like that, but
I am curious ab
23 matches
Mail list logo
