Subject: Re: 'program cc1 got fatal signal 11'
To: David Brownlee <abs@anim.dreamworks.com>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <cgd@pa.dec.com>
List: port-arm32
Date: 04/29/1998 09:20:12
> 	How much of a performance hit would avoiding all LDMs be?
> 	Unless it is significant it would seem sensible to provide an
> 	easy compile time switch to enable/disable the use of 'LDM'.
> 	I believe gcc has similar workarounds for other chips.
> 
> 	Personally I would default this to on - I consider it more
> 	important that the default work everywhere, than be faster on
> 	some machines and broken on others, but I am certainly not in
> 	any position to make any decisions here :)

Right.  Something like: add a 'bug workarounds' variable in addition
to the cpu architecture variable(s) in gcc, use the cpu
architecture(s) to select certain default bug workarounds (maybe all
for the selected architecture(s)).  Then allow workarounds to be
disabled with flags, if people know what they're doing.



cgd