Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 15:18:11 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: K?vesd?n G?bor <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amd64 optimized gcc? Message-ID: <20050525221811.GA49299@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <4294BB08.3090703@t-hosting.hu> References: <200505251317.22128.nb_root@videotron.ca> <4294BB08.3090703@t-hosting.hu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 07:51:04PM +0200, K?vesd?n G?bor wrote: > Hello, >=20 > As for the optimization, I'm very interested how fast can be an actual=20 > optimized system. The stock release doesn't optimizes too much, afaik it= =20 > uses -O. I have been experimenting for a while with building the whole=20 > system with my custom cflags, and yesterday I succeeded. I managed to=20 > build the whole system with >=20 > CFLAGS=3D-s -Os -march=3Dathlon64 > COPTFLAGS=3D-s -Os -march=3Dathlon64 >=20 > I might have used -O2 instead of -Os but not -O3 which made a=20 > compilation error. This might make you feel good, but unless you're running a CPU-bound workload you're unlikely to be able to measure any difference. > The -s is for srtipping the binaries and libs, because this is intended= =20 > to be used on a production system, where we use stable software=20 > releases, thus we don't need debug symbols Binaries are already stripped as they're installed. Kris --BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFClPmjWry0BWjoQKURArCgAJ0bBDRwQV8I83GcI5fjYGvlUykrhACdHRCR LZrCpQAkxamgj19S0K96wWc= =T6i9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050525221811.GA49299>