[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Most reliable version of avr-gcc?

From: John Regehr
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Most reliable version of avr-gcc?
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 16:25:16 -0700 (MST)
User-agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20)

You might find Table 1 of our recent paper interesting.  The paper's here:


There are three lines that show empirical failure rates for avr-gcc 3.4.3, 4.1.2, and 4.2.2, in terms of volatile errors and regular old miscompilations.

It is interesting that the "functional error" rate for avr-gcc is significantly higher than x86-gcc. My guess is that the miscompilations that we are seeing are the known problems in the avr backend that are sometimes discussed on this list (last discussed in the context of the new integrated register allocator, I think).

John Regehr

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, David Carr wrote:

By reliability, I mean least probability of undetected errors in machine code generation. IE: The machine code conforms to the source code.


Weddington, Eric wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden
org] On Behalf Of David Carr
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 2:34 PM
To: address@hidden
Subject: [avr-gcc-list] Most reliable version of avr-gcc?

If one were to compile a program for the AVR where reliability was far
more important than code size or performance optimizations, what version
of avr-gcc would you choose?

What do you mean by 'reliability'?

AVR-GCC-list mailing list

reply via email to

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