This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [BusyBox] Re: Long term code compactness regression

So, will we retain the option of setting an aligned stack along with -Os
?  On most of my applications, -Os together with -funroll-loops and
aligned data is the fastest running combination for ia32, by a large
margin.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paolo Carlini" <pcarlini@unitus.it>
To: "David Schleef" <ds@schleef.org>
Cc: <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 5:11 AM
Subject: Re: [BusyBox] Re: Long term code compactness regression


> David Schleef wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 02:20:26AM -0700, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 05:35:30PM -0700, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> > > > 3.0.2                       -O2 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2
212844
> > > > 2.95.4-pre          -O2 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2
204076
> > > > HEAD                        -O2 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2
202616
> > >
> > > s/-O2/-Os/ for all of these. Whoops.
> > >
> >
> > This raises the question: why doesn't -Os imply
> > -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2?
>
> It will in 3.1, see this recent checkin by Alexandre Oliva:
>
>     http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2001-10/msg00511.html
>
> Cheers,
> Paolo.
>
>
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]