Re: [PATCH] Fix tests optimization removal code with -Os

[g . esp]

----- Mail original -----
> De: "g esp" <address@hidden>
> À: "Akim Demaille" <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Envoyé: Vendredi 8 Juin 2012 12:47:41
> Objet: Re: [PATCH] Fix tests optimization removal code with -Os
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
> > De: "Akim Demaille" <address@hidden>
> > À: "Gilles Espinasse" <address@hidden>
> > Cc: address@hidden
> > Envoyé: Vendredi 8 Juin 2012 08:49:29
> > Objet: Re: [PATCH] Fix tests optimization removal code with -Os
> > 
> > Hi Gilles,
> > 
> > Thanks for the feedback!
> > 
> > Le 7 juin 2012 à 08:44, Gilles Espinasse a écrit :
> > 
> > > Looking my test log and using -Os, I saw code does not what
> > > comment
> > > say in -Os case.
> > 
> > I remove -O2 because I failed to find a means to silence
> > GCC warnings in that case.  So it is really a known
> > *deficiency* to remove these flags, and the future
> > is to keep them.  So, unless it does change how the way
> > the test suite behaves, I'd rather not do that.
> > 
> 
> I understand. And I was a bit afraid -Wl,-O1 could match but that
> should be only inside LDFLAGS, not CFLAGS
> 
> Without -Os filtered, I have no warnings with my gcc-4.4.5 and could
> have 0 failure on test suite.
> 
> I say I /could/ because tests 173 and 301 fail if build following
> actual LFS build order.
> The reason is yet unclear, and I haven't yet look in details.
> bison-2.5 test suite was fine with same package build order.
> 

Now I understand better.
I need to apply my patch to fix tests 173 and 301 failures because both 
produced .c code emitting various 'may be used uninitialized in this function' 
warnings when -Os is not removed.

Gilles