This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Options disabled under -Os
- From: <Visda dot Vokhshoori at microchip dot com>
- To: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 16:49:47 +0000
- Subject: Options disabled under -Os
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=microchip.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=microchip.com; dkim=pass header.d=microchip.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=iZIHi9rnAi2ooHp80DcaQp3NSQ1WDdJe4rerTVDcF04=; b=EW7fDm16dD7lXAd3Bg6LJSESnSnHViDraD1RVgURaRZqy6pajN6XC2z1XaAovEhkgAt2pVi3jmnSrz3n//9P6SnZhnt1JBQs1TJ2htyilgPmlIEE9GdUngGaZyc5TiZIc/B4ArSqGSpRTDp9tL6tKMyWRpDMSGEbGw6pwrZiSKK2W1T/jKmiLRgtPu4AZLMON8a1RQV0bR97FhegNAUZ5HwFwz10X6cSi/tqHYLXuDopm26WgRIYAU0MIfwXTwiqkQh6brgD00RoFSAQTxAspp86KSZlQuc0FJV4tcSlg8oAWRxzC8jbB7jytl/KnleynYzul06lwDfJiqeOSFpdKA==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=EGH8tlW7fQRqZ55BV2/vVuRr4bCYLPAYh/8N52D+VL01ztPmnC57z4zdSfKLz51tOm+Jw4D2rkufAqR4gv/9OBgb73AilpS4UGfNcbDJovb3Hls/tRBUDsUPYvKst9RnyEd1j0acOXvU0lq5p+Mi94szPk9kXSam2OE/QADpjizrnqWA5whMdaP6yIPc3W4aSElNIxK7ejfJUK9LT8Xo2dtHRidM0zZZN3zmzRN9GarN6I+1TJW81YKe1o2AMAr1NnjjZQrOuzqMOKNnRbnJ2SdBaEfshVhky3i/vOcuqnUmfpPhbEDHARXoLDw82uvZuss4Nj4u0rlVsRUpuX1TCw==
- Ironport-sdr: 3HkbY73gCgk6SxZzHpT780uQNCX9giNZx9O3GWH8nbZxDPcp0/cFv+N0zeOyXzRnf47BAJddd3 0NLDGZZ+FufeiQutqAwga+4pM9Ja1g/mpBOLTSexuBg8cmngKzBPsodGLFNfjFffIKWSVY+m/m Z/cbke68VgrhDXL7Tl8Q2qEYTHdRYEqBswBwtzjjMkA/c57dwiD+J3lAhXlNTRvqCOkfOh3O6N eHxleYfp/po7TNgKPk+/LsTTNuo8SzEuNGCX9YpXjaSRFe7WcZMLg2JmHGtlQTFcc8BJMC0In1 uE0=
Hello,
In GCC documentation, 3.1 Options that Control Optimization: it is indicated -Os disables alignment of functions, jumps, labels, and loops. However, with -v -Q passed to the compile step, I see all these options enabled under -Os. Is this intended behavior, therefore a documentation bug?
I have tried this with GCC4.4.7 and GCC8.3.1
Thanks,
Visda