This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Optimization docs part 3
- From: Jerry Quinn <jlquinn at optonline dot net>
- To: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 08:24:29 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optimization docs part 3
- References: <E18OBAY-0001iI-00@tiamat><Pine.BSF.4.51.0212301120020.39825@pulcherrima.dbai.tuwien.ac.at><15889.43774.302910.988834@dragon.optonline.net><Pine.BSF.4.51.0212311543090.49565@naos.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
Gerald Pfeifer writes:
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, Jerry Quinn wrote:
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg00859.html
>
> For -Os, Geoff had noted
>
> Should this also say something like "This enables the following
> optimisation flags" (plus a list of the flags)?
>
> but the patch hasn't changed. (The new documentation is still better
> than the previous one, so I committed the patch anyway.)
I had thought that it was clearer and easier to maintain, since -Os
is so similar to -O2 at the flag level. Do you think an explicit list
would be better?
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg00860.html
>
> Has this been reviewed by Geoff or someone else more familiar with
> the options than me as well?
It turns out there was some discussion about it (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-08/msg01778.html), but it
wasn't approved at the time. The issue was a list of platforms for
-fomit-frame-pointer. I removed the list from the revised patch to
avoid the issue.
> I'm happy to actually apply these patches or review and apply simpler
> ones, but someone like Geoff should better review the more substantial
> ones.
>
> > ps: parts 4 and 5 are
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg00866.html
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg00867.html
>
> Part 5 is now also installed on mainline and the
> 3.3-branch. Thanks!
Great! So I still need Geoff or equivalent to look at these two, right?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg00860.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg00866.html
I appreciate your getting these patches applied.
Jerry