On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 6:37 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
>> On Thursday, December 22, 2011 9:51:47 pm Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>> On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Thu Dec 22 11, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>>> >> On Thu
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 08:04:32PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2011-12-23 18:55, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 06:03:42PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> ...
> >>The only thing my patch makes sure of, is that amd64 does the same thing
> >>as all other arches, e.g.: compile
On Fri Dec 23 11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2011-12-23 18:55, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 06:03:42PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> ...
> >>The only thing my patch makes sure of, is that amd64 does the same thing
> >>as all other arches, e.g.: compile with a low optimization
On 2011-12-23 18:55, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 06:03:42PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
...
The only thing my patch makes sure of, is that amd64 does the same thing
as all other arches, e.g.: compile with a low optimization settings for
debug (-O, which is equivalent to -O1)
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 06:03:42PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2011-12-23 17:00, Alexander Best wrote:
> ...
> >>>Back in the 7.x days, I ran into some code that wasn't easily to debug
> >>>because the compiler optimized things out with -O2 by inlining and
> >>otherwise shifting around code,
On 2011-12-23 17:00, Alexander Best wrote:
...
Back in the 7.x days, I ran into some code that wasn't easily to debug because
the compiler optimized things out with -O2 by inlining and
otherwise shifting around code, so setting breakpoints in gdb became difficult.
So from that point on I've go
On Fri Dec 23 11, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Thursday, December 22, 2011 9:51:47 pm Garrett Cooper wrote:
> > On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu Dec 22 11, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> > >> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Alexander Best wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Thu Dec 22 11, Dimi
On Thursday, December 22, 2011 9:51:47 pm Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
>
> > On Thu Dec 22 11, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Alexander Best wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu Dec 22 11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would
On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
> On Thu Dec 22 11, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Alexander Best wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu Dec 22 11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
Hi,
I would like to ask some feedback on the attached patch, which cleans up
the kernel o
On Thu Dec 22 11, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Alexander Best wrote:
>
> >On Thu Dec 22 11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I would like to ask some feedback on the attached patch, which cleans up
> >>the kernel optimization options for amd64. This was touched upon
> >>earl
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Alexander Best wrote:
On Thu Dec 22 11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
Hi,
I would like to ask some feedback on the attached patch, which cleans up
the kernel optimization options for amd64. This was touched upon
earlier by Alexander Best in freebsd-toolchain, here:
i've been us
On Thu Dec 22 11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to ask some feedback on the attached patch, which cleans up
> the kernel optimization options for amd64. This was touched upon
> earlier by Alexander Best in freebsd-toolchain, here:
i've been using such settings for a few months now
Hi,
I would like to ask some feedback on the attached patch, which cleans up
the kernel optimization options for amd64. This was touched upon
earlier by Alexander Best in freebsd-toolchain, here:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain/2011-October/000270.html
What this patch atte
13 matches
Mail list logo
