From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13075 invoked by alias); 30 Sep 2013 08:12:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 13057 invoked by uid 89); 30 Sep 2013 08:12:05 -0000 Received: from bart.luffy.cx (HELO bart.luffy.cx) (78.47.78.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:12:05 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: bart.luffy.cx Received: from bart.luffy.cx (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bart.luffy.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id E28BD1446C; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 10:12:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from guybrush.luffy.cx (off.mal.dm.gg [188.65.121.251]) by bart.luffy.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4BB014063; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 10:12:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: by guybrush.luffy.cx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 88CEC920; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 10:11:59 +0200 (CEST) From: Vincent Bernat To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" Cc: systemtap@sourceware.org Subject: Re: semantic error: not accessible at this address References: <8738opg9ym.fsf@guybrush.luffy.cx> <20130927230432.GA32221@redhat.com> <87wqm1etsz.fsf@guybrush.luffy.cx> <20130927232529.GB32221@redhat.com> <87pprtesfe.fsf@guybrush.luffy.cx> <20130928000247.GC32221@redhat.com> <871u49e68v.fsf@guybrush.luffy.cx> <20130928124645.GA17249@redhat.com> <20130929141158.GB17249@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:12:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Vincent Bernat's message of "Mon, 30 Sep 2013 09:05:00 +0200") Message-ID: <87fvsmd8z4.fsf@guybrush.luffy.cx> User-Agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-q3/txt/msg00408.txt.bz2 =E2=9D=A6 30 septembre 2013 09:05 CEST, Vincent Bernat = =C2=A0: >>> I can also advocate to Debian and Ubuntu to use this CFLAGS for future >>> kernel releases. Is there any drawback to this flag (I assume not)? Is >>> it still useful when GCC version is fixed? I mean, can we assume that we >>> will run in future GCC bugs and that will help to workaround them in the >>> future? >> >> I believe it is purely advantageous and worth advocating elsewhere. > > I have asked both Ubuntu and Debian to use this flag: > > http://bugs.debian.org/724976 > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1233014 Unfortunately, I discovered that this option was added to GCC 4.7 and hence is not available in GCC 4.6.3. --=20 Make it clear before you make it faster. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)