From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754005Ab3AXOnh (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:43:37 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:44381 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753311Ab3AXOnf (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:43:35 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 15:46:12 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Ingo Molnar Cc: ling.ma.program@gmail.com, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ma Ling Subject: Re: [Suggestion] [x86]: Compiler Option Os is better on latest x86 Message-ID: <20130124144612.GC13471@pd.tnic> Mail-Followup-To: Borislav Petkov , Ingo Molnar , ling.ma.program@gmail.com, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ma Ling References: <1356503537-4987-1-git-send-email-ling.ma@alipay.com> <20130124141733.GA14876@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130124141733.GA14876@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 03:17:33PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > So our initial conclusion is Os is better than O2 for current > > & coming x86 CPUs. If I was wrong, please correct me. > > Did you patch the kernel, or used CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE? > > (there was no patch in your mail.) Hmm, I'm not sure about -Os: 3a55fb0d9fe8e2f4594329edd58c5fd6f35a99dd And 0.01/0.03 IPC improvement doesn't really look too persuasive IMO. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --