This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: linux 2.1.117 built with egcs-1.1 19980823
- To: Andi Kleen <ak at muc dot de>
- Subject: Re: linux 2.1.117 built with egcs-1.1 19980823
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 21:10:40 -0600
- cc: damon LOVE <dlove at georgiatech-metz dot fr>, egcs at cygnus dot com
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <k2hfz3iaeb.fsf@zero.aec.at>you write:
> In article <Pine.GSO.3.96.980823205649.9780B-100000@chateau.georgiatech-met
> z.fr>,
> damon LOVE <dlove@georgiatech-metz.fr> writes:
> > Using egcs-2.91.54 19980823 (gcc2 ss-980609 experimental)
> > I was able to build linux kernel 2.1.117 on a redhat 5.1
> > machine... (amd k6 233)
>
> I did the same, but noticed a 50k increase of the image compared to
> the same tree build with gcc 2.7.2.3. I'm not sure about the reasons
> yet.
>
>
> 2.7.2.3 options: -O2 -m486 -fno-strength-reduce -malign-loops=2
> -malign-functions=2 -malign-jumps=2 -fomit-frame-pointer
> egcs options: -O2 -mpentiumpro -fno-strength-reduce -fomit-frame-poin
Could be alignment related. egcs aligns code according to intel's
recommendations, which may (or may not) account for some increase.
If you could look into this it would be greatly appreciated.
Presumably you are comparing text sizes and not being confused by
other stuff like debug symbols, minimal symbol tables, etc.
jeff