[parisc-linux] Re: g++ (3.3): ...Error: Field out of range

[Joel Soete]

Hello Dave,

> > Ah, in fact I well read it also but do not figure out because of man
comment:
> > "max-inline-insns
> >    If an function contains more than this many instructions, it
> >    will not be inlined.  This option is precisely equivalent to
> >    -finline limit.
> > "
> >
> > Anyway, I try 300, 200, 100 and stop at 50 without any more success :-(
> > (I can still try lower?)
>

Could it be different in 3.3? I try with 5 and no success but...

> Actually, I see that the `val' from -finline-limit sets the parameters
> as follows in 3.4:
>
>       set_param_value ("max-inline-insns", val);
>       set_param_value ("max-inline-insns-single", val/2);
>       set_param_value ("max-inline-insns-auto", val/2);
>       set_param_value ("max-inline-insns-rtl", val);
>       if (val/4 < MIN_INLINE_INSNS)
>	{
> 	  if (val/4 > 10)
>	    set param_value ("min-inline-insns", val/4);
> 	  else
> 	    set_param_value ("min-inline-insns", 10);
> 	}
>
> You might also try -fno-default-inline and -fno-inline, but it's
> looking as if inlining isn't the driving factor in the size of
> the routine.

Yes the inlining is one factor:

The first works (see <http://lists.parisc-linux.org/pipermail/parisc-linux/2003-June/020202.html>
;) and certainly the second too;

but also a better news:
(I definitely need to clean my glasses: in man default -finline-limit=600)

and it so works with -finline-limit= something between 350 (works) and 400
(failled). Now I am curious to see the differences between --param and this
-finline-limit (if i have some time)?

Thanks for all,
    Joel

ps: sorry to report so late but my wife was angry because test was too long

---------------------------------
Tiscali ADSL: 19,50 euros/mois...abonnez-vous sur www.tiscali.be