[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0
From: |
Sean D'Epagnier |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0 |
Date: |
Thu, 7 May 2009 00:20:34 -0600 |
Thanks for all the input.
I will do some more investigating myself and hopefully produce a small
test case as well as try to track down the actual commits to gcc which
caused it. Unfortunately I suspect there are multiple causes to
blame. I will post back when I have more information. I thought
someone might have a guess or know right away what might have caused
this.
Thanks,
Sean
On 5/6/09, Weddington, Eric <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:
>> address@hidden
>> [mailto:address@hidden
>> org] On Behalf Of Sean D'Epagnier
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:45 PM
>> To: address@hidden
>> Subject: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was trying to reduce the size of my binary so it would fit on some
>> 128kb parts. I normally used gcc 4.2.2 for this project, but decided
>> to try gcc 4.5.0. To my surprise, the resulting binary was 3.5kb
>> _larger_ with the newer gcc. This is a serious bug imho and should be
>> fixed. I'm not quite sure why it did occur, but I have some guesses.
>> I have here the old (4.2.2 gcc) then the new (4.5.0 gcc) disassembly:
>
> The first step is to fill out a bug report at the GCC project. Let me know
> the bug number so I can track it.
>
> Next, it needs to be determined which version caused the biggest problem.
> 4.2.x? 4.3.x? 4.4.0? Or HEAD/4.5? It could just get progressively worse with
> each version, or perhaps there is some big jump in code size.
>
- [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Sean D'Epagnier, 2009/05/06
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Steven Michalske, 2009/05/06
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, David Kelly, 2009/05/06
- RE: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Weddington, Eric, 2009/05/06
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0,
Sean D'Epagnier <=
- RE: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Schwichtenberg, Knut, 2009/05/07
- Message not available
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Kang Tin LAI, 2009/05/07
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Bob Paddock, 2009/05/08
- RE: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Weddington, Eric, 2009/05/08
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Rolf Ebert, 2009/05/09
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] regression in size from 4.2.2 to 4.5.0, Bob Paddock, 2009/05/09