Subject: Re: Using current gcc & binutils and NetBSD -current speeds
To: None <>
From: Ian Dall <>
List: port-pc532
Date: 11/27/2002 10:17:35
Simon Burge <> writes:

  > Ian Dall wrote:
  >> Simon Burge <> writes:
  >> > I have managed to build a kernel with current gcc and binutils.  Most
  >> > files built with -O2, but I needed a build a couple with -O1 to avoid
  >> > 	internal compiler error: in general_operand, at recog.c:1023
  >> > type errors.
  >> What FSF Version does this correspond to? The NetBSD CVS repository
  >> still seems to be at 2.95.3.

  > When I said "current gcc and binutils", I meant gcc-current and
  > binutils-current, cvs updated just a couple of days ago.

Ah, good. I'll try and look at it this weekend. Certainly the ICE should not

  > I see the problem, but don't know enough about asm constraints to work
  > out how to get around it.  What about simply marking r0 as both an input
  > and output register?  Being an output register as well, wouldn't this
  > effectively mark it as "clobbered"?

Yes, in fact that is probably more correct. It maybe that the compiler was objecting
to something being both an input operand and clobbered.

  > Btw, is there a good ns32k instruction set reference anywhere?  I
  > currently only have my ns32k series databook, which has the instruction
  > listing, but is not a reference.

Well, I have an instruction set reference for the 32032. The only
reference I have for the newer instructions is the data book
though. Its hard copy unfortunately, I wonder if we have a scanner
with a document feeder around here.

  >> That was fixed. I haven't had the time to work on this lately, but I
  >> am not aware of any outstanding ns32k specific bugs in the FSF current
  >> gcc as of a several months ago.

I am now though as you reported above.

  > I think it's safe to say that we can target gcc 3.3 for ns32k
  > cross-building, and wasting time back-porting to older gcc versions
  > probably isn't worth the effort.

OK. That gives me some encouragement.