Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:28:10 +0200 | From | Jörn Engel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Make gcc3.3 Eliminate Unused Static Functions |
| |
On Fri, 13 June 2003 09:03:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > > ... only if we say a min gcc version of 3.3 however, yes? Otherwise the > kernel gets rather bloated. Just how wide-spread (and Good To Use) is > gcc-3.3 now?
I haven't seen a clear compiler bug yet, but found two bugs in assembler code with 2.95.3 that compiled without problems with 3.2.x. One of them has actually hit people, as you could see in the code. Most symptoms were "fixed", but the cause remained.
If nothing else, I'd like to keep 2.95 as a code checker for at least a year or two. Give 3.x some more time to mature.
Jörn
-- Measure. Don't tune for speed until you've measured, and even then don't unless one part of the code overwhelms the rest. -- Rob Pike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |