This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: [PATCH, FT32] initial support
- From: James Bowman <james dot bowman at ftdichip dot com>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 23:57:53 +0000
- Subject: RE: [PATCH, FT32] initial support
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CA9BBF0458F83C4F9051448B941B57D117152C33 at glaexch1>,<alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1502032249130 dot 21283 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CA9BBF0458F83C4F9051448B941B57D117157677 at SNGEXCH1 dot ftdi dot local>,<alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1502111702190 dot 24912 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
> > +@table @gcctabopt
> > +
> > +@item -mspace
> > +@opindex mspace
> > +Enable code-size optimizations.
> > +Some of these optimizations incur a minor performance penalty.
>
> We already have -Os, so why is an architecture-specific option for this
> needed?
Code compiled with -mspace is somewhat slower than code without.
So we typically build *all* code with -Os, with everything
non-critical also compiled -mspace.
Is this a legitimate option or should I just use -Os?
--
James Bowman
FTDI Open Source Liaison