Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/defconfig: Turn on CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE= y in the 64-bit defconfig
[Posted January 29, 2013 by corbet]
| From: |
| "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-AT-zytor.com> |
| To: |
| Steven Rostedt <rostedt-AT-goodmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org> |
| Subject: |
| Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/defconfig: Turn on CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE= y in the 64-bit defconfig |
| Date: |
| Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:04:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID: |
| <bc2bf9ae-5e4b-47ba-bb3b-172cd6e124f4@email.android.com> |
| Cc: |
| Borislav Petkov <bp-AT-alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan-AT-linux.intel.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich-AT-suse.com>, ling.ml-AT-alipay.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx-AT-linutronix.de>,
linux-tip-commits-AT-vger.kernel.org |
| Archive-link: |
| Article, Thread
|
We have discussed -Ok(ernel) with the gcc guys in earnest. They are receptive but lack the round
tuits.
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 11:43 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> The problem, of course, is that most -O2 code generation is done
>> assuming hot loops that don't show much if any I$ issues. And the -Os
>> thing is done *purely* for size, not taking any performance into
>> account at all. There's no balanced middle ground, which is what _we_
>> would want.
>
>Gcc needs to implement a -Olinus
>
>;-)
>
>-- Steve
--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting.
(
Log in to post comments)
