Hi All,
From the GCC manual, its clear that optimization options from –O1 to
–O3 or any greater level emphasis On the performance while –Os
emphasis only on the code size, it (-Os) says nothing about the
performance (execution time).
In our case : Size in case of –Os is less than that in case of
Inder wrote:
Hi All,
From the GCC manual, its clear that optimization options from –O1 to
–O3 or any greater level emphasis On the performance while –Os
emphasis only on the code size, it (-Os) says nothing about the
performance (execution time).
In our case : Size in case of –Os is less than
Inder wrote:
Hi All,
From the GCC manual, its clear that optimization options from –O1 to
–O3 or any greater level emphasis On the performance while –Os
emphasis only on the code size, it (-Os) says nothing about the
performance (execution time).
In our case : Size in case of –Os is less than
> Looking at assembly listings of the Linux kernel I see thousands of
> places where function returns are checked to be non-zero to indicate
> errors. For example something like this:
>
> mov bx, 0
> .L1
>call foo
>test ax,ax
>jnz .Lerror
Another calling convention could be to no
On May 24, 2006, at 2:54 AM, Etienne Lorrain wrote:
Another calling convention could be to not only return the "return
value"
in %eax (or %edx:%eax for long long returns) but also its
comparisson to
zero in the flags, so that you get:
call foo
jg .Lwarning
jnz .Lerror
And you
* Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-24 01:32]:
> Could you please add http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-05/
> msg01295.html and http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-05/
> msg01296.html since I have no wiki account to do this myself.
I've done this now, thanks.
--- Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On May 24, 2006, at 2:54 AM, Etienne Lorrain wrote:
> > Another calling convention could be to not only return the "return
> > value" in %eax (or %edx:%eax for long long returns) but also its
> > comparisson to zero in the flags, so that you get:
> > call foo
> >
Was just looking again at the assembly file generated by GCC, and noted
this pattern I have already seen - maybe beginning with 4.0.
In short:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/projet/gujin$ /home/etienne/projet/toolchain/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../configu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Russ Allbery) wrote on 22.05.06 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I do that also, but I am also careful to prune repository
> > directories (CVS, .svn or SCCS even). I rather doubt it is my RAM,
> > BTW. Perhaps a disk sector, but I'll nev
Hello,
I have read the mail of Steven Bosscher
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-05/msg00272.html), and while IMO
he takes the situation too personally, he raises several interesting
points. In particular, some of the statements remind me of my own
experiences with the work on loop optimize
Andreas Krebbel wrote:
when cse replaces registers in an insn it tries to avoid calls to
validate_change, what causes trouble in some situations.
From validate_canon_reg:
/* If replacing pseudo with hard reg or vice versa, ensure the
insn remains valid. Likewise if the insn has MATCH_
On May 24, 2006, at 7:47 AM, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
Obviously, there is no perfect solution for this problem. However,
here
are several ideas for proposals that I believe could help:
1)
Proposal: Whenever a new pass or a major functionality is added to
gcc, a maintainer
Hi,
> On those grounds, please submit a change to fix both places in
> cse.c. If we run into further problems of this kind, we'll have to
> rethink whether such patterns are valid.
Ok. I'll do so as soon as possible. Unfortunately the trivial fix of
just removing the else branch doesn't work.
Recently (I can't tell when this changed, exactly, but it's within the
last few weeks) I've been unable to compile a big Java program because
my computer runs out of memory. gcj version 4.1 compiles this program
correctly, although it uses about a gigabyte of RAM. gcj version 4.2
can't do it even
With recent gcc we're blowing up in unshare because the use of
COMPOUND_EXPRs in Java leads to very deep recursion.
The easisest thing seems to be to use a STATEMENT_LIST rather than a
COMPOUND_EXPR.
Andrew.
2006-05-24 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* decl.c (java_add_stmt): Use
On 5/23/06, Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has work been done to evaluate a calling convention that takes error
> checks like this into account? Are there size/performance wins? Or am
> I just reinventing a variation on exception handling?
This introduces an extra stack push and will co
Hello,
> On May 24, 2006, at 7:47 AM, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> >Obviously, there is no perfect solution for this problem. However,
> >here
> >are several ideas for proposals that I believe could help:
> >
> >1)
> >
> > Proposal: Whenever a new pass or a major functionality is added to
> >
Hello world,
bootstrap appears to be broken totally on i686-pc-linux-gnu (see PR 27763).
Can somebody have a look?
Thomas
Hi,
I guess everybody is very busy. However, it would be nice to set up a
page in the GCC Wiki with the list of projects accepted for this year
SoC and some links. If someone has this information, I would volunteer
to "wikify" it.
Cheers,
Manuel.
PS: yeah, I am also interested part ;-) I would
We are students of Warsaw University of Technology and we are in our
final year.
We've just started working on our final project at our university.
We'd like to develop the STL library and enhance it with some features.
We checked out the GNU source using the svn command:
svn -q checkout svn://g
We are students of Warsaw University of Technology and we are in our
final year.
We've just started working on our final project at our university.
We'd like to develop the STL library and enhance it with some features.
We checked out the GNU source using the svn command:
svn -q checkout svn://g
> Now, we'd like to modify the gnu sources that we downloaded and test the
> changes in our programm.
> In other words, we don't want to recompile the standard library that is
> installed on our computer, but we'd like to make some changes in the
> downloaded repository and check if our programms i
Dave:
Gerald, you've jumped to a false conclusion there; "was hijacked" should
read "has bitrotted".
"Hijacked" is a pejorative term, and also historically and factually
inaccurate. Objsw.com maintained the FAQ initially, but some time ago (around
2001 off the top of my head) it became cl
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 05:17:03PM -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote:
> ... I am still quite committed to the
> crossgcc community, but I'm doing a lot of work behind the scenes as of
> late
> I'm happy to resume hosting the crossgcc document, but I don't have the
> time at the moment to give it a
Joe et al:
But the GCC project already has a Wiki, at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki
which is actively maintained by the developers. I think it would be
best to use that wiki, we'd have better odds that active developers
would keep it current if it were in the wiki they use.
I completely ag
25 matches
Mail list logo
