Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 01:17:00 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6vesd=E1n_G=E1bor?= <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu> To: Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD - Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 Message-ID: <42E815EC.20309@t-hosting.hu> In-Reply-To: <ef10de9a050726171649b6869@mail.gmail.com> References: <ef10de9a05072613007ac60130@mail.gmail.com> <42E69B11.6070208@t-hosting.hu> <ef10de9a050726171649b6869@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nikolas Britton wrote: >On 7/26/05, Kövesdán Gábor <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu> wrote: > > >>Nikolas Britton wrote: >> >> >> >>>Is it just me or is -O2 now the default for kernel builds? What about >>>-Os, safe to use? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>So is it for me. But if I specify some CFLAGS, for example -O3 >>-march=athlon64, the >>building fails, but CFLAGS mustn't affect the kernel compiling process >>afaik. There is >>COPTFLAGS for that reason. I've also made a PR about this new, unwanted >>behaviour, >>but haven't got any answers so yet. >> >> >> > >You are right, COPTCLAGS is for the kernel only. -O3 is not officially >supported for CFLAGS or COPTFLAGS. If you use -O3 for CFLAGS it will >break some ports. Also from my experience using anything higher then >CPUTYPE=p2 will break ports (like gstreamer). > >This is what I normally add to my make.conf file: >CPUTYPE=p2 >CFLAGS= -Os -pipes >COPTFLAGS= -Os -pipes >#CXXFLAGS= don't remember what I set this too, don't use it a lot. > >If I want a port to build with different settings I just tell it to >inline... make CPUTYPE=p4 install clean etc. > > > Yes, I know -O3 isn't supported for either, but I didn't mean ports. The kernel building fails with this: CFLAGS=-O3 -march=athlon64 #COPTFLAGS=-O3 -march=athlon64 <-This is commenred out! And this breaks the kernel compiling. See this: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=83995 >As far as -O2 as the default for the kernel... I thought it was more >important to have a small kernel then a faster but fatter one. The >smaller the kernel the more you can put in L1,2, and 3 cache and the >smaller the program the less it needs to hit ram, swap, and hard disk? >isn't this what apple does with their OS-X builds? > > I also use -Os -march=athlon64 on the server I administer. :) Cheers, Gábor Kövesdán
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42E815EC.20309>