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

From: Fariborz Jahanian <fjahanian at apple dot com>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb at suse dot de>
Cc: law at redhat dot com, Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:29:13 -0700
Subject: Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
References: <B7C12C01-DBA8-4F56-9DF3-4BE0C45D5ADD@apple.com> <1120155806.4621.233.camel@localhost.localdomain> <DA02021B-4192-42DB-BB1E-D50FAC3D8386@apple.com> <200506302147.15097.stevenb@suse.de>

On Jun 30, 2005, at 12:47 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:


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.

OK. This seems to be the consensus and I will prepare a patch base on that.

- Thanks, fariborz

Gr.
Steven

References:
- [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
  - From: Fariborz Jahanian
- Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
  - From: Jeffrey A Law
- Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
  - From: Fariborz Jahanian
- Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
  - From: Steven Bosscher

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