Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > > Well, I can tell you why, but it doesn't help you: the 3.4.2
> > > compiler has different deficiencies in reload than the 4.x line of
> > > compilers. To make the whole thingy work on all co
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > Well, I can tell you why, but it doesn't help you: the 3.4.2 compiler
> > has different deficiencies in reload than the 4.x line of compilers.
> > To make the whole thingy work on all compilers trying and testing is
> > required to avoid
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > > But I'm not talking about the clobber list at all. I reacted to the
> > > first mail forwarded to me, which was a question specifically about
> > > the hunk adding the "q" constraint, whose
Am 18.01.2008 um 15:43 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Michael Matz wrote:
But I'm not talking about the clobber list at all. I reacted to the
first mail forwarded to me, which was a question specifically about
the
hunk adding the "q" constraint, whose purpose I explained
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > But I'm not talking about the clobber list at all. I reacted to the
> > first mail forwarded to me, which was a question specifically about the
> > hunk adding the "q" constraint, whose purpose I explained. Are you now
> > also asking a
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Michael Matz wrote:
> But I'm not talking about the clobber list at all. I reacted to the
> first mail forwarded to me, which was a question specifically about the
> hunk adding the "q" constraint, whose purpose I explained. Are you now
> also asking about the change
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > But apparently it has! With gcc < 4 I did never get the error.
> >
> > As I tried to explain, this is pure luck.
>
> Maybe.
>
> > > Which probably means that gcc < 4 did _not_ use ecx, and therefore it
> > > does not have to be pushed
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > > > > asm (" ... movzbl %b1, %%edx\n ... " : : "r" (blubb), "r" (bla) );
> > > >
> > > > Okay, but this only concerns gcc4, apparently.
> > >
> > > No, it's nothing to do with GCC.
> >
> > But
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > > asm (" ... movzbl %b1, %%edx\n ... " : : "r" (blubb), "r" (bla) );
> > >
> > > Okay, but this only concerns gcc4, apparently.
> >
> > No, it's nothing to do with GCC.
>
> But apparently it has! With gcc < 4 I did never get the error.
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:14 AM, consul wrote:
>
> > It broke mingw build with gcc-3.4.2
>
> Does it work if you change the lines I'll comment on below?
Yes, if I force the pushing and popping of ecx, it compiles
(unfortunately, I could not test th
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > > > >+#if DATA_SIZE == 1 || DATA_SIZE == 2
> > > > >+ "q" (v),
> > > > >+#else
> > > > > "r" (v),
> > > > >+#endif
> > > > > "i" ((CPU_TLB_SIZE
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > >+#if DATA_SIZE == 1 || DATA_SIZE == 2
> > > >+ "q" (v),
> > > >+#else
> > > > "r" (v),
> > > >+#endif
> > > > "i" ((CPU_TLB_SIZE - 1) << CPU_TLB_ENTRY_BITS),
> > > > "i"
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Michael Matz wrote:
> [answering to a forwarded mail, hence breaking thread, sorry]
> [and keep me CCed :) ]
Sorry, I never break Cc: list, but always reply-to-all.
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> > >On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> >
I am merely resending this mail so Michael knows the exact error
message.
Please have him CCed when replying to this thread.
On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:14 AM, consul wrote:
It broke mingw build with gcc-3.4.2
gcc -Wall -O2 -g -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-reorder-blocks -fno-
gcse-fno-optimize
;
> >Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> >Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/5] Fix i386 Host
> >Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> >
> > >On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, consul wrote:
>
On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:14 AM, consul wrote:
It broke mingw build with gcc-3.4.2
Does it work if you change the lines I'll comment on below?
gcc -Wall -O2 -g -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-reorder-blocks -fno-
gcse-fno-optimize-sibling-calls
-fno-crossjumping -fno-align-labels -fno-ali
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, consul wrote:
>
> > It broke mingw build with gcc-3.4.2
>
> Now that's funny, since the last incarnation Alexander should have
> _exactly_ the same code as before for gcc < 4. Are you sure that you do
> not have appli
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, consul wrote:
> It broke mingw build with gcc-3.4.2
Now that's funny, since the last incarnation Alexander should have
_exactly_ the same code as before for gcc < 4. Are you sure that you do
not have applied the patch that exchanges at least one "#ifdef HOST_I386"
fo
It broke mingw build with gcc-3.4.2
gcc -Wall -O2 -g -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-reorder-blocks -fno-gcse
-fno-optimize-sibling-calls
-fno-crossjumping -fno-align-labels -fno-align-jumps -fno-align-functions
-mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -fomit-frame-pointer -I. -I..
-I/c/qemu/targ
19 matches
Mail list logo
