On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 08:47:36PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > David O'Brien wrote: > >On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 04:21:12PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > >>>What I fixed was an amd64 build problem. The thread starter here was > >>>talking about pentium-m builds, so I assume its i386 in this case. > >>Yes, the threads jumped back and forth between people experiencing > >>problems with non-default CFLAGS <..snip..> > > > > > >I've heard those problems on and off for a year now - with no one > >experiencing the problem spending sufficient effort to provide a decent > >analysis of the issue. > > Re-read the threads. There is a lot of good analysis on how gcc was > emitting SSE instructions. I don't see how that could be the case: RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/boot/i386/Makefile.inc,v .. ---------------------------- revision 1.10 date: 2005/03/15 18:43:36; author: obrien; state: Exp; lines: +2 -1 Ensure GCC does not use FP registers in integer code. I think all we really need is -fno-sse2. I really don't like cluttering up the compiler invocation, but this bigger hammer will fix reported problems for now. ---------------------------- diff -u -u -0 -r1.9 -r1.10 --- Makefile.inc 9 Feb 2004 14:11:55 -0000 1.9 +++ Makefile.inc 15 Mar 2005 18:43:36 -0000 1.10 _at__at_ -8 +8,2 _at__at_ -CFLAGS+= -ffreestanding -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 +CFLAGS+= -ffreestanding -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 \ + -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow -mno-sse -mno-sse2 An _analysis_ would be someone experiencing a problem clearly showing SSE[2] instructions in their .s files. Along with figuring out why the above flags didn't handle the issue. Also telling the results of trying CPUTYPE={<empty>,i486,pentium,pentium-pro,pentium3m,pentium4,pentium4m} (or <empty>,i486,pentium,k6,k6-2,athlon,athlon-xp). -- -- David (obrien_at_FreeBSD.org)Received on Tue May 24 2005 - 12:44:50 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:35 UTC