[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1

From: Björn Haase
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Don't use gcc 3.4.4, use 4.0.1
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:04:37 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.7.1

Hi Eric,

I have re-investigated PR21990 today and observed that it no longer appears in 
mainline. It is also absent in today's cvs state of the 4.0 branch. 
Dunno whether the original problem has been fixed or whether something else 
has changed such that the bug is no longer exposed. Unfortunately, we 
probably could not exclude completely the possibility that there is still a 
latent bug: Since the register allocator in the recent versions seems to be 
smarter than it used to be, the test case function that had a clobbered frame 
pointer in the past no longer needs any frame pointer. So this function could 
no longer expose the bug.

Since I have now been working for quite a while without seeing any serious 
problem with 4.0, I'd like to withdraw my serious objections that I had had 
against it after having observed PR21990.


E. Weddington wrote on Freitag, 19. August 2005 06:55 :
> Denis Chertykov wrote:
> >"E. Weddington" <address@hidden> writes:
> >>Personally I would still hesitate to use it in any type of production
> >>environment because of these two GCC bugs:
> >><http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21990>
> >><http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21107>
> >>
> >>Bug #21990 is a "wrong code" type bug and was submitted by Björn
> >>Haase. He stated in the beginning:
> >>"I have observed a wrong code bug that I judge to be so serious that
> >>IMHO one should discourage use of the avr port for 4.x.x until it is
> >>resolved."
> >
> >I can't reproduce this bug with current mainline.
> >
> >Denis.
> Hi Denis,
> Thanks for taking a look at this. Did you happen to leave a comment in
> the bug report saying that you couldn't reproduce this bug in the
> current mainline? If you didn't, could you please do this? That way it's
> still tracked.
> Thanks
> Eric Weddington

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]