From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lse-tech <lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:06:30 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <233640000.1044551189@[10.10.2.4]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1044553691.10374.20.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk>
>> All done with gcc-2.95.4 (Debian Woody). These machines (16x NUMA-Q) have
>> 700MHz P3 Xeons with 2Mb L2 cache ... -Os might fare better on celeron
>> with a puny cache if someone wants to try that out
>
> gcc 3.2 is a lot smarter about -Os and it makes a very big size
> difference according to the numbers the from the ACPI guys.
>
> Im not sure testing with a gcc from the last millenium is useful 8)
I'll retest with gcc-3.2 ... maybe it'll finally show a case where it's
better than 2.95 this way?
<ducks> <runs>
M.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-06 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-03 23:05 gcc 2.95 vs 3.21 performance Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-03 23:22 ` [Lse-tech] " Andi Kleen
2003-02-03 23:31 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-02-04 0:43 ` J.A. Magallon
2003-02-04 13:42 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-02-04 14:20 ` John Bradford
2003-02-04 6:54 ` Denis Vlasenko
2003-02-04 7:13 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-04 12:25 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-02-04 15:51 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-04 16:27 ` [Lse-tech] " Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-04 17:40 ` Patrick Mansfield
2003-02-04 17:55 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-04 9:54 ` Bryan Andersen
2003-02-04 15:46 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-04 19:09 ` Timothy D. Witham
2003-02-04 19:35 ` John Bradford
2003-02-04 19:44 ` Dave Jones
2003-02-04 20:11 ` John Bradford
2003-02-04 20:20 ` John Bradford
2003-02-04 20:45 ` Herman Oosthuysen
2003-02-04 21:44 ` Timothy D. Witham
2003-02-05 7:15 ` Denis Vlasenko
2003-02-05 10:36 ` Andreas Schwab
2003-02-05 11:41 ` Denis Vlasenko
2003-02-05 12:20 ` Dave Jones
2003-02-05 13:10 ` [Lse-tech] " Dipankar Sarma
2003-02-05 15:30 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-04 21:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-02-04 21:54 ` John Bradford
2003-02-04 22:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-02-04 23:27 ` Timothy D. Witham
2003-02-04 23:21 ` Larry McVoy
2003-02-04 23:42 ` b_adlakha
2003-02-05 0:19 ` Andy Pfiffer
2003-02-04 23:51 ` Jakob Oestergaard
2003-02-05 1:03 ` Hugo Mills
2003-02-10 22:26 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2003-02-10 23:28 ` J.A. Magallon
2003-02-04 23:51 ` Eli Carter
2003-02-05 0:27 ` Larry McVoy
2003-02-06 20:42 ` Paul Jakma
2003-02-05 3:03 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-02-05 6:03 ` Mark Mielke
2003-02-07 16:09 ` Pavel Machek
2003-02-04 10:57 ` Padraig
2003-02-04 13:11 ` Helge Hafting
2003-02-04 13:29 ` Jörn Engel
2003-02-04 14:05 ` P
2003-02-04 20:36 ` Herman Oosthuysen
2003-02-04 12:20 ` [Lse-tech] " Dave Jones
2003-02-04 15:50 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-10 12:13 ` Momchil Velikov
2003-02-06 15:42 ` gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-06 15:51 ` [Lse-tech] " Andi Kleen
2003-02-06 17:48 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-06 17:06 ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2003-02-06 20:38 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-06 21:32 ` John Bradford
2003-02-06 22:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-02-06 22:58 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-06 23:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-02-06 23:59 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-02-06 23:17 ` Roger Larsson
2003-02-06 23:33 ` Martin J. Bligh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='233640000.1044551189@[10.10.2.4]' \
--to=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®