This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: [PATCH, FT32] initial support
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: James Bowman <james dot bowman at ftdichip dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 12:39:21 +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> <CA9BBF0458F83C4F9051448B941B57D11716AFEC at glaexch1>
On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, James Bowman wrote:
> > > +@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.
The typical way of doing that would be to compile the critical code with
-O2, everything else with -Os. It's expected -Os may produce slower code
Joseph S. Myers