[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Smoking gun: NetBSD 6.0.1 userland instability
At 9:25 PM -0500 3/7/13, Michael wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>On Mar 7, 2013, at 1:59 PM, Donald Lee wrote:
>>>>> In the old days, I would just use "-g", and presume that the
>>>>> optimization was disabled, but modern compilers don't do that any
>>>> The only thing -g should do is enable debugging symbols; it doesn't
>>>> generally have an effect on optimization. Perhaps you mean -O0?
>>> No, I think more likely -dgl- was talking about "the old days", when,
>>> yes, -g did indeed kill the optimizer. It's been a while, but there
>>> was such a time.
>> ...back when the dinosaurs roamed the earth, and computers had front panels
>> with switches and lights.
>> Thus sayeth the Old Guys. ;->
>> If anyone can give me some confidence in what switches I need to use to
>> get what we need, I can do the experiment(s).
>- -mno-altivec or -mcpu=750 ( or anything else that's not a g4 or g5 )
>That doesn't keep libc from running altivec code though.
libc detects the CPU on the fly and uses different code to do its
job on the fly? That's either cool - or terrifying. ;->
(terrifying for the poor shmuck trying to debug altivec kernel prob)
Given that libc doesn't do that, we would have to build all our libraries
with the lowest-common-denominator instruction set, or somehow trap/emulate
the altivec like m68K FPU does. I don't think our install/build process
builds multiple libraries for different PPC CPU variations, does it?
My ignorance is vast in this area.....
Main Index |
Thread Index |