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: VTA guality assessment: better than -O0 ;-)

From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Cc: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 11:17:32 -0400
Subject: Re: VTA guality assessment: better than -O0 ;-)
References: <orzlccioay.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <84fc9c000906130823yd6a6296x947a972c7d2535d5@mail.gmail.com> <200906132000.35949.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <20090613200839.GK3101@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>

On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 10:08:39PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> I really think we need to do (limited) -fvar-tracking even for -O0, it is
> really bad that most arguments have wrong locations through the prologue,
> while at -O1 or above they often have correct location.
> We should just do the tracking inside of the prologue or for register
> variables, those that are stored into memory during the prologue and live in
> memory shouldn't be tracked outside of the prologue at -O0.

I completely agree, this would make GDB more useful.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

Follow-Ups:
- Re: VTA guality assessment: better than -O0 ;-)
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

References:
- VTA guality assessment: better than -O0 ;-)
  - From: Alexandre Oliva
- Re: VTA guality assessment: better than -O0 ;-)
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: VTA guality assessment: better than -O0 ;-)
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: VTA guality assessment: better than -O0 ;-)
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

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