From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Patch Tracking <patches@linaro.org>,
Andreas Tobler <andreast@freebsd.org>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-1.7] target-i386: Fix build by providing stub kvm_arch_get_supported_cpuid()
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:58:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52825009.10506@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA9KEQ7XjVk=Ez+Yb0_vrzk6GcFRj7PiT8faSg6U4dwJHA@mail.gmail.com>
Il 12/11/2013 16:32, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> > Is this FUD or do you have examples of bad debuggability of -O1 code?
>
> The clang manpage says specifically "Note that Clang debug
> information works best at -O0. ", and I see no reason to
> disbelieve it. In particular, they don't say "we definitely
> will never add an optimization to -O1 that makes the debug
> info much worse".
This doesn't quite answer my question. It looks like another bug that
should be reported to clang. "-O1 is somewhere between -O0 and -O2"
(quoted from the man page) is a joke, it's not documentation.
Every time I look at clang, it seems to me that they are still relying
on the "buzz" from their "better syntax errors" blog posts (undeserved
these days), and from clang-analyzer (deserved).
I don't really see a reason why QEMU should give clang more weight than
Windows or Mac OS X.
Paolo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Patch Tracking <patches@linaro.org>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Andreas Tobler <andreast@freebsd.org>,
Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-1.7] target-i386: Fix build by providing stub kvm_arch_get_supported_cpuid()
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:58:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52825009.10506@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA9KEQ7XjVk=Ez+Yb0_vrzk6GcFRj7PiT8faSg6U4dwJHA@mail.gmail.com>
Il 12/11/2013 16:32, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> > Is this FUD or do you have examples of bad debuggability of -O1 code?
>
> The clang manpage says specifically "Note that Clang debug
> information works best at -O0. ", and I see no reason to
> disbelieve it. In particular, they don't say "we definitely
> will never add an optimization to -O1 that makes the debug
> info much worse".
This doesn't quite answer my question. It looks like another bug that
should be reported to clang. "-O1 is somewhere between -O0 and -O2"
(quoted from the man page) is a joke, it's not documentation.
Every time I look at clang, it seems to me that they are still relying
on the "buzz" from their "better syntax errors" blog posts (undeserved
these days), and from clang-analyzer (deserved).
I don't really see a reason why QEMU should give clang more weight than
Windows or Mac OS X.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-12 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-11 21:22 [PATCH for-1.7] target-i386: Fix build by providing stub kvm_arch_get_supported_cpuid() Peter Maydell
2013-11-11 21:22 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-11 21:28 ` Andreas Tobler
2013-11-11 21:28 ` [Qemu-devel] " Andreas Tobler
2013-11-11 22:19 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-11 22:19 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-11 22:38 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-11 22:38 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-11 23:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-11 23:11 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-11 23:21 ` Anthony Liguori
2013-11-11 23:21 ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2013-11-12 7:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 7:09 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 11:07 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 11:07 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 12:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 12:09 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 12:16 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 12:16 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 13:12 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 13:12 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 13:21 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 13:21 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 13:26 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-12 13:26 ` [Qemu-devel] " Gleb Natapov
2013-11-12 13:23 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-12 13:23 ` [Qemu-devel] " Gleb Natapov
2013-11-12 13:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 13:57 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 14:09 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-12 14:09 ` [Qemu-devel] " Gleb Natapov
2013-11-12 14:14 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 14:14 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 14:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 14:57 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 15:13 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 15:13 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 15:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 15:21 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 15:32 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 15:32 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 15:58 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2013-11-12 15:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 16:08 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 16:08 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 17:04 ` Anthony Liguori
2013-11-12 17:04 ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2013-11-12 17:20 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 17:20 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 18:54 ` Richard Henderson
2013-11-12 18:54 ` Richard Henderson
2013-11-12 18:57 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 18:57 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 19:15 ` Stefan Weil
2013-11-12 19:15 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefan Weil
2013-11-12 22:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-12 22:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-13 2:27 ` Richard Henderson
2013-11-13 2:27 ` Richard Henderson
2013-11-13 7:25 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-13 7:25 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-11-13 22:23 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-13 22:23 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-13 7:26 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-13 7:26 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-12 14:01 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-12 14:01 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
2013-11-11 23:23 ` Peter Maydell
2013-11-11 23:23 ` [Qemu-devel] " Peter Maydell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52825009.10506@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=aliguori@amazon.com \
--cc=andreast@freebsd.org \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.