This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86


On Thursday 30 June 2005 21:05, Fariborz Jahanian wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2005, at 11:23 AM, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 20:12 +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >> Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> >>> I'd tend to agree.  I'd rather see the option go away than linger on
> >>> if the option is no longer useful.
> >>
> >> I wouldn't mind that, but I'd also like to point out that there are
> >> Makefiles out there which hard-code things like -fforce-mem.  Do
> >> we want
> >> to keep the option as a stub to avoid breaking them?
> >
> > Excellent point.  I believe in other cases we've kept the option
> > around for a release, then killed it.
>
> I would also like to keep this feature around for a while. It is
> possible that setting of this option under -O2/-O3 has masked some
> optimization bugs. In which case, addition of -fforce-mem would be a
> temporary workaround.

Well, maybe so, but it would be a pretty lame workaround.  Why are you
so worried about bugs?  This flag was always disabled at -O1, and we
have never seen any bug reports that got fixed with -fforced-mem.  And
besides, it is better to fix bugs than to work around them.

Making the option a nop, issuing a warning in 4.1 and removing the
option completely for gcc 4.2 looks like a very reasonable approach to
me.

Gr.
Steven


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]