Re: Gcc 3.2.2 vs gcc 3.2.3

From: Jens Rehsack <>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:45:21 +0000
Holger Kipp wrote:


> imho memtest seems to be suitable for this-is-real-broken-memory(tm) only.

Yes, memtest86 could only detect bad memory. No reported failure doesn't
says anything except memtest86 didn't found any error.

> It might be that due to differnent optimisations (gcc 3.2.2 vs gcc 3.2.3) 
> you might escape the bitpatterns that would otherwise trigger the sig 11.

There're several bugs known in gcc-3.2, some of them are removed in
gcc-3.3, some of them are scheduled to be fixed in gcc-3.4.
The best recommendation to optimization (if you don't want to research
atr is using -O and not more.

Received on Mon Sep 22 2003 - 05:45:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:23 UTC