From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 16:57:40 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [autobuild.buildroot.net] Build results for 2013-10-10 In-Reply-To: References: <20131011063009.335B352C1A0@lolut.humanoidz.org> <20131011163133.7755b2c0@skate> Message-ID: <20131011165740.0ab665cc@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Thomas De Schampheleire, On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 16:51:29 +0200, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > > Should this be done only for the SuperH architecture? Only for the > > affected external toolchains? > > Not sure what the best approach is. Checking just for the architecture > is the simplest. > > Checking on the toolchain is complex: > - for the Sourcery toolchains: the problem shows with the most recent > SuperH toolchain we support at the moment, so I don't think it's worth > trying to avoid -O2 on older toolchains than that. > > - for other external, or internal toolchains, we can't predict whether > the problem would show (I don't know which combinations of gcc, libc, > ... are the killer) > > What do you think? Just do it for SuperH as a whole, with a nice comment on top of this line. That's the easiest way. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com