[ECOS] arm-elf-gcc 3.2.1 bug: "unsigned" vs. "unsigned long" ?
Jay Foster
jay@systech.com
Wed Feb 25 21:29:00 GMT 2009
I don't know about that problem, but I don know that the arm-elf-gcc 3.2.1
compiler does generate bad code sometimes. I switched to 3.4.3 and no more
bad code generation. It's been too long for me to remember the specifics.
I think it had something to do with not properly manipulating the stack
pointer allowing for a race condition that could corrupt the stack.
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: Grant Edwards [mailto:grante@visi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:38 PM
To: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
Subject: [ECOS] arm-elf-gcc 3.2.1 bug: "unsigned" vs. "unsigned long"?
Somebody has reported to me that he thinks the arm-elf-gcc
3.2.1 toolchain we use for eCos development has a bug such that
declaring a variable as "unsigned" doesn't always generate
correct code, but changing the declaration to "unsigned long"
will fix the problem. Moreover he thinks that files containing
"unsigned" variables will compile/link correctly sometimes and
incorrectly at other times. But, changing "unsigned"
declarations to "unsigned long" makes things better.
No, there aren't any source/object files that demonstrate the
problem. :/
I've been using this toolchain for a long time (at least 6-7
years), and I've never observed this problem or heard anybody
else report it.
Google hasn't found anything that sounds similar, but I thought
I should ask here if anybody has heard of such a problem.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow!
at
BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-BI-
visi.com
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
More information about the Ecos-discuss
mailing list