Preventing gcc from aligning stack???

[Johan Kullstam]

Horst von Brand <vonbrand en sleipnir.valparaiso.cl> writes:

> "Johan Kullstam" <kullstam en ne.mediaone.net> said:
> > Horst von Brand <vonbrand en sleipnir.valparaiso.cl> writes:
> > > My question in this vein would be the -fno-strength-reduce. The gcc bug
> > > that placed this in the kernel was in gcc-2.7.2, and was worked around in
> > > 2.7.2.3 by just making this option unconditional. Both 2.2.15pre4 and
> > > 2.3.41pre2 at least demand gcc-2.7.2.3 as minimal version.
> 
> > just when you thought it was safe to go into the water...
> > 
> > strength-reduction is broken again in gcc-2.95.2 (aka the current
> > release).  i'm not sure about what versions actually do work.
> 
> egcs-1.1.2-24 (Red Hat 6.1) and egcs-20000117 (next to last weekly
> snapshot, I couldn't build the very last one due to a stupid bug, fixed
> just after the snapshot was out) work fine here (i686).
> 
> Did you report this to gcc-bugs en gcc.gnu.org?

it's been reported; it's even been fixed!  however, the fix is only in
a development version -- not in a "stable" release.  the most recent
release as found on ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc/gcc-java-2.95.2.tar.gz
dated 25 october most definitately *does* suffer from this bug.

there hasn't been any new release or bug-fix since october 1999.
judging from lurking on the gcc list it doesn't look like any new
release is immanent either (since there hasn't been any calls for code
freezes and such).

gcc 2.96 (not a release) doesn't suffer from it.  debian
offers a patched version of 2.95.2.  where do the rest of us go for
working gcc?  are we expected to pull things off the cvs tree at
cygnus?

-- 
J o h a n  K u l l s t a m
[kullstam en ne.mediaone.net]
Don't Fear the Penguin!

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo en vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/