From: Fred Fish <fnf@public.ninemoons.com>
To: cagney@gnu.org (Andrew Cagney)
Cc: fnf@ninemoons.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Outwit compiler dead code elimination in break.exp test
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 18:10:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200312011809.hB1I9ZJA030357@fred.ninemoons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FCB7FF9.4090601@gnu.org> from "Andrew Cagney" at Dec 01, 2003 12:52:57 PM
> I know that GCC will now, when -O is specified, inline (and thence
> eliminate) pure functions. However, I don't think that should occure
> when -O isn't specified.
It doesn't. The gdb specifically uses optimization for the test that
is currently failing:
FAIL: gdb.base/break.exp: run until breakpoint set at small function, optimized file
> As for stopping GCC from eliminating code - last time this came up (ref
> store.exp) it was recommended that the .c files be split so that GCC
> couldn't see the potential optimization.
If that is the prefered solution, I can rework the patch.
-Fred
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-01 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-29 23:05 Fred Fish
2003-11-30 1:04 ` Fred Fish
2003-11-30 1:07 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-30 1:26 ` Fred Fish
2003-12-01 0:46 ` Fred Fish
2003-12-01 14:58 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-12-01 15:30 ` Fred Fish
2003-12-01 15:46 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-12-01 16:39 ` Fred Fish
2003-12-01 14:23 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-12-01 14:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-12-01 17:52 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-12-01 18:10 ` Fred Fish [this message]
2003-12-09 1:02 ` Michael Snyder
2003-12-07 21:21 ` [PATCH] Outwit compiler dead code elimination in break.exp test (revised patch) Fred Fish
2003-12-08 0:31 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-12-01 16:55 [PATCH] Outwit compiler dead code elimination in break.exp test Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2003-12-08 23:49 [PATCH] Outwit compiler dead code elimination in break.exp test (revised patch) Andrew Cagney
2003-12-09 5:06 ` [PATCH] Outwit compiler dead code elimination in break.exp test Fred Fish
2003-12-09 6:52 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2003-12-29 20:20 ` Elena Zannoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200312011809.hB1I9ZJA030357@fred.ninemoons.com \
--to=fnf@public.ninemoons.com \
--cc=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=fnf@ninemoons.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox