linux user group brescia

On ven, nov 02, 2001 at 02:33:34 +0100, Bauno wrote:
> Gcc 3.0 doesn't always build correct kernels. Its very much a .0 release -

oddio, ora gli scazzi con il gcc-3.0 e il kernel sono stati risolti
(fondamentalmente toccavano casistiche con smp, ecc), per situazioni banali
infatti hanno sempre funzionato anche i beta del gcc-3.0.

scopro ora pero` che, essendo il codice del kernel scritto in modo da
ottimizzare il codice prodotto dal compilatore, ed essendo questo,
ovviamente, strettamente legato al compilatore stesso e alla sua versione,
con il gcc-3.0 viene prodotto codice meno efficiente.

visto che vanno di moda i quoting:

Subject: Re: kernel compiler
To: weber a nyc.rr.com (John Weber)
Date:   Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:45:03 +0100 (BST)
Cc: linux-kernel a vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <3BD82DC0.7697B1AF a nyc.rr.com> from "John Weber" at Oct 25,
2001 11:20:32 AM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <E15wmgp-0005E8-00 a the-village.bc.nu>
From: Alan Cox <alan a lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner a vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List:         linux-kernel a vger.kernel.org
Status: RO
Content-Length: 677
Lines: 15

> > At the moment, gcc3 doesn't work too well with the kernel, and you
> > won't
> > get any large benefit.
> 
> I use gcc3 to compile anything and everything I need.  With the
> exception of "multi-line literal complaints", my kernel compiles fine.
> 
> Is there anything that I should know?

Mostly that gcc 3.0 generally produces slower code. I've had a couple of 
noticed glitches with -ac but those have workarounds in the tree now