From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 99682 invoked by alias); 30 May 2016 10:05:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Received: (qmail 99665 invoked by uid 89); 30 May 2016 10:05:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*F:D*mk, H*RU:sk:gateway, Hx-spam-relays-external:sk:gateway, HX-HELO:sk:gateway X-HELO: gateway20.websitewelcome.com Received: from gateway20.websitewelcome.com (HELO gateway20.websitewelcome.com) (192.185.44.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 30 May 2016 10:05:28 +0000 Received: from cm7.websitewelcome.com (cm7.websitewelcome.com [108.167.139.20]) by gateway20.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B95BD7FC0A0B0 for ; Mon, 30 May 2016 05:05:26 -0500 (CDT) Received: from montecarlo.websitewelcome.com ([192.185.12.42]) by cm7.websitewelcome.com with id 0a5R1t00d0uS5qw01a5SN5; Mon, 30 May 2016 05:05:26 -0500 Received: from [195.189.206.101] (port=39646 helo=[192.168.209.11]) by montecarlo.websitewelcome.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.86_1) (envelope-from ) id 1b7K4a-00028q-Sb; Mon, 30 May 2016 05:05:25 -0500 To: Stanislav Meduna , "ecos-discuss@sourceware.org" References: <56B22002.7010503@meduna.org> From: =?UTF-8?B?SWxpamEgS29jaG8gW9CY0LvQuNGY0LAg0JrQvtGH0L5d?= Message-ID: <574C1063.3080002@siva.com.mk> Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 10:05:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56B22002.7010503@meduna.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BWhitelist: no X-Exim-ID: 1b7K4a-00028q-Sb X-Source-Sender: ([192.168.209.11]) [195.189.206.101]:39646 X-Source-Auth: sivamk X-Email-Count: 2 X-Source-Cap: c2l2YW1rO2JpYmltYW47bW9udGVjYXJsby53ZWJzaXRld2VsY29tZS5jb20= X-IsSubscribed: yes Subject: Re: [ECOS] eCos and Keil X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg00006.txt.bz2 Hi Stano, I am playing with GCC 6.1 and it gives 20% beetter Coremark than GCC 4.9. I would like to submit GCC 6.1 as a replacement for GCC 4.6 but there's one important issue with GCC 5.0 and newer. Namely, they have adopted GCC 11 as standard mode rather than 89. which mainly affects inlining. For the time being I have solved this problem by enforcing 89 mode on GCC, but I am in a dilemma whether to: 1. Enforce mode 89 (as I do now) 2. Make eCos to work in C11 mode. In this case I will need some help. Regards Ilija On 03.02.2016 16:42, Stanislav Meduna wrote: > Hi, > > did anybody try to tweak the eCos to allow building with Keil > MDK-ARM? > > The thing is Keil produces _much_ smaller (a saving of 1/3 > is often doable) and faster code. For embedded systems > this matters a lot. > > I understand that this is not trivial, as some of the code > is dependent on gcc-specific features and the build system > is tailored to the GNU tools. > > Thanks -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss