Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1

To: mike <localgost@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, debian-68k@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
From: Maxim Kuvyrkov <maxim@codesourcery.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:50:59 +0400
Message-id: <4A9F9183.2040403@codesourcery.com>
In-reply-to: <8259f0250909021822k70b1a152sce6ecc651334800@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8259f0250908302028n9b0cb56td402539007736fce@mail.gmail.com> <20090831120617.GA1114@marenka.net> <8259f0250908310558l3ddd5fam7d15946a7c1e8572@mail.gmail.com> <8259f0250908311511h77270544vb2dc3dd383f1add8@mail.gmail.com> <8259f0250908311516r49e54c7fi44ead0f040cade30@mail.gmail.com> <20090901151747.GB27514@marenka.net> <8259f0250909021816g2b6a37dfs9bd91c4cabaf457a@mail.gmail.com> <8259f0250909021822k70b1a152sce6ecc651334800@mail.gmail.com>

mike wrote:

I tried to boot 2.6.29 or whatever... It was so slow compared to 2.4 i
donno what to say, except its crap. Not a surprise if gcc produces
crappier and crappier 68k binaries anyway.

Would you mind submitting a bug report or two with preprocessedtestcases showing examples of bad code generation on m68k, especially ifthe code has regressed since some previous version of GCC?


Please CC me on the bug reports.

Thanks,

--
Maxim K.
CodeSourcery

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
  - From: mike <localgost@gmail.com>

References:
- Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
  - From: Stephen R Marenka <stephen@marenka.net>
- Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
  - From: mike <localgost@gmail.com>
- Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
  - From: mike <localgost@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
Next by Date: Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
Previous by thread: Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
Next by thread: Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread