Re: Simple Question on CPU specific Optimization Options

12 msg	char y = 469;
3 msg	Finding the address of a symbol in a release build

RE: Simple Question on CPU specific Optimizatio...
\ Hofman, Gertjan (BI35) (25 Aug 2007)
. \ Ian Lance Taylor (25 Aug 2007)
. \ Rask Ingemann Lambertsen (25 Aug 2007)

3 msg	C - Pass by reference to pointers
5 msg	Warning using sprintf('%llu', uint64_t) on AMD64
1 msg	Wrong list, please ignore this thread!
1 msg	CMAKE_MODULE_PATH not remembered?
3 msg	removing a statement
3 msg	building 4.2.1 from 3.4.6 on NetBSD/amd64 3.1
3 msg	No way to cleanup at thread exit for __thread v...
1 msg	is 'app' reserved?
2 msg	File Not found error
2 msg	Two errors creating a converter between two types
3 msg	Help with gfortran
1 msg	is there a general linux development mailing list?
2 msg	stdint.h
5 msg	set of statements using a variable
1 msg	gcc 4.2.1 on Niagara (UltraSPARC T1): output us...
7 msg	Maintaining multiple stacks
7 msg	Is gcc a complete universal (not bound to any O...

Subject:	Re: Simple Question on CPU specific Optimization Options
Group:	Gcc-help
From:	Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
Date:	25 Aug 2007

On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 08:15:10PM -0400, Hofman, Gertjan (BI35) wrote:

> In order to find out what is causing the removal I replaced -O with all
> the -fxxxxx options listed in man gcc. This does not replicate the
> problem ! In otherwords, -O does more that the sum of all the -fxxx
> options.

Sounds very much like -ftree-dse. Please see bug web/32965
<URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32965>.

--
Rask Ingemann Lambertsen