Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:10:06 +0800
From:      Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To:        David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.berkeley.edu>
Cc:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Ray Kohler <ataraxia@cox.net>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Compiling with high optimization?
Message-ID:  <20030209141006.GB33928@skywalker.creative.net.au>
In-Reply-To: <20030209002542.GA20812@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
References:  <20030208173756.GA56030@arkadia.nv.cox.net> <20030208232724.GA20435@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <3E459BF3.BB3FC381@mindspring.com> <20030209002542.GA20812@HAL9000.homeunix.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Feb 08, 2003, David Schultz wrote:

> Yes, the possibility of being bitten by compiler bugs is certainly
> higher with higher optimization levels.  Alpha with -O2 seems to
> have been broken for years, and I have seen strange things happen
> on IA64 as well.  But the i386 code generators have received much
> wider testing and debugging, so there is somewhat less danger there.

Yet squid under i386 freebsd is .. well, finds -O bugs in gcc.
We gave up trying -O under FreeBSD a long time ago. :-)

(note: I've seen better performance gains by telling gcc exactly what
CPU you have over -O65536 ..)



Adrian

-- 
Adrian Chadd			<angryskul> learning is bad
<adrian@FreeBSD.org>		  <angryskul> it just makes the people around you dumber
(angryskul == alfred@irc)	    <angryskul> :(


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030209141006.GB33928>