From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Thibault Subject: [PATCH3] Don't optimize function calls with -g Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:58:18 +0000 Message-ID: <20080307145818.GA5627@implementation.uk.xensource.com> References: <20080306160138.GB10848@implementation.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Keir Fraser, le Fri 07 Mar 2008 13:36:31 +0000, a écrit : > Note that we do CFLAGS ?= ... in StdGNU.mk and SunOS.mk right > now. Probably these should be changed to +=. Ooh, that's why I missed the already existing -fno-omit-frame-pointer there. > Whether SunOS should really have different usage of omit-frame-pointer is > open to argument. Ok, I'll leave it to people who actually run a SunOS system :) Don't optimize function calls on GNU systems with debug=y by enforcing the addition of -fno-omit-frame-pointer, and adding -fno-optimize-sibling-calls. Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault diff -r fb74347d80c3 config/StdGNU.mk --- a/config/StdGNU.mk Wed Mar 05 12:20:40 2008 +0000 +++ b/config/StdGNU.mk Fri Mar 07 14:54:43 2008 +0000 @@ -45,5 +45,5 @@ CFLAGS ?= -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer CFLAGS ?= -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer else # Less than -O1 produces bad code and large stack frames -CFLAGS ?= -O1 -fno-omit-frame-pointer +CFLAGS += -O1 -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fno-optimize-sibling-calls endif