Date:	Thu, 2 Mar 2000 16:22:55 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Debugging difficulties with GCC 2.95.2
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.LNX.4.10.10003021405310.11752-100000@acp3bf>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000302161750.27132E-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:

> There's new machine specific,
> undocumented '-mschedule-prologue' switch that tells gcc how the function
> prologue (maybe also epilogue) is to be generated. It can either be done
> by a piece of RTL that is subject to optimization, along with the rest of
> the code, or it can be output 'manually', in the final step when RTL is
> transformed to the actual assembly. The default is to use RTL output, in
> gcc-2.95.2. I have yet to find out when this change occured, and if the
> problem coincides with that source change.

Funny, a similar problem seems to be bugging the GDB test suite.  You 
might find the thread whose subject is "Regressions problem (200 
failures)" interesting.  If you don't read gdb AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com, you 
can browse it via the Web at http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb/2000-q1.

> Compiling with '-g -O1 -mno-schedule-prologue' seemed to fix the problem.

What happens if you use -O2 -mno-schedule-prologue?  If that still 
produces correct debug info, perhaps we want to introduce 
-mno-schedule-prologue into specs?  Andris, what do you think?

> > If not, does this seem like a GCC bug or a GDB bug?  I want to know
> > where to report this.
> 
> It's GCC bug, I'd say. You can clearly see the difference in the assembly
> output from GCC.

Thanks, I will report this there, with CC: to the GDB mailing list.

- Raw text -