[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

gcc compiler -O flags

Sergei Organov wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius <ralf.corsepius at rtems.org> writes:
>> On Fri, 2007-05-25 at 11:26 -0400, Kate Feng wrote:
>>> For this particular  case that Till mentioned,  the result is inversed
>>> between -O,  and -O2 (-O4,  too). 
>> Does this affect any code in RTEMS or is this an accademical example?
> I doubt it affects any code in RTEMS, as even Chain implementation, that
> does use overlapping nodes, doesn't store anything but NULL into the
> overlapping part.
Of course, in my suspicious mind the question arises:
does incorrect reordering/scheduling occur in other,
less academic cases? Without understanding the
internal details of the optimizer I just don't know the
answer and that leaves some worries...
>> In any case, did any of you report this to gcc@?

-- Till
> Me didn't.
> -- Sergei.
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-users mailing list
> rtems-users at rtems.com
> http://rtems.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users