On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 04:42:49PM +0100, Julian Brown wrote: > On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 22:53:46 +0800 > Yao Qi <y...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > > > LP:602190(https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/602190) and > > LP:602285(https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/602285) are > > related to this patch below. You can get more details from comments > > of these bugs, since I've added my understand of the cause in > > comments. > > > > This patch is to improve the performance of generated code, however, > > these two bugs are related to this patch(, correct me if I am wrong). > > Now, we have two options, 1) revert this patch, and make these test > > case pass; 2) keep this patch and fix test cases, 3) fix bugs and keep > > this patch, > > > > What do you think? > > I don't particularly like the "CSL LOCAL" markers in a non-CSL-local > branch, but I don't think that's what you're asking :-). > > We're talking about the Linaro 4.4 branch here, right? I'm planning to > add appropriate "-fno-unroll-loops" options to affected tests on the 4.5 > branch (that is not done yet), but I wasn't planning to do the same for > 4.4. I don't see why we can't though.
Yeah, I am talking about linaro 4.4. "-fno-unroll-loops" is useful here, however it is a little bit like "distant water cannot quench present thirst" (a Chinese idiom). Maybe, we can fix them on 4.5 once your -fno-unroll-loops is ready. Micheal/Ulrich, your comment is welcome. -- Yao Qi CodeSourcery y...@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x739 _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
