From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021202162114.01d3dad0@mail.lauterbach.com> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:35:05 +0100 To: "Kevin B. Hendricks" From: Franz Sirl Subject: Re: asm inline Cc: Andreas Schwab , linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org In-Reply-To: <200212021011.55105.kevin.hendricks@sympatico.ca> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20021202154112.0512a008@mail.lauterbach.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20021202154112.0512a008@mail.lauterbach.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: At 16:11 02.12.2002, Kevin B. Hendricks wrote: >Hi, > >Here is what Sun's Hamburg developers wrote in reply... > > > Hi Kevin, > > > > -fstrict-aliasing is in -O2 optimization since gcc-3.0.x. And no, our > > code is not strict alias safe. You'll get some problems, I know of at > > least one place in sc. I bet there are more. > > > > I recommend to use -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing. This is what Hamburg > > release engineering currently uses. > > > > If someone is able to identify all strict alias violating places I would > > be more than happy to propose that we change these (or add the > > -fno-strict-alias to just these files). > > > > Heiner > >So it looks like Solaris and Win must not detect these issues already. >So a backport of the gcc 3.3 warning flag would certainly be a big help to >the OOo project as well. I see, but I think there is no chance that this is backported to an official 3.2 release. Also 3.3 is only a few month away, so it makes no real sense. Franz. ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/