[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090718120145.GB31007@elte.hu>
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:01:45 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] Makefile: Never use -fno-omit-frame-pointer
* Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:16:30AM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > According to Segher Boessenkool and GCC manual, -fomit-frame-pointer
> > is only the default when optimising on archs/ABIs where it doesn't
> > hinder debugging and -pg. So, we do not get it by default on x86,
> > not at any optimisation level.
> >
> > On the other hand, *using* -fno-omit-frame-pointer causes gcc to
> > produce buggy code on PowerPC targets.
> >
> > If Segher and GCC manual are right, this patch should be a no-op
> > for all arches except PowerPC, where the patch fixes gcc issues.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
> > ---
> >
> > See this thread for more discussion:
> > http://osdir.com/ml/linux-kernel/2009-05/msg01754.html
> >
> > p.s.
> > Obviously, I didn't test this patch on anything else but PPC32. ;-)
> >
> > Segher, do you know if all GCC versions that we support for
> > building Linux are behaving the way that GCC manual describe?
>
> No news is good news... Ingo, can we merge this into -tip for
> testing?
Changes to the top level Makefile should really go via Sam's kbuild
tree.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists