From owner-freebsd-stable  Wed Mar  7 11:18:15 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.57])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFBC337B718
	for <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed,  7 Mar 2001 11:18:11 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mvh@ix.netcom.com)
Received: from netcom1.netcom.com (lai-ca4d-141.ix.netcom.com [209.110.247.141])
	by mclean.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA09273;
	Wed, 7 Mar 2001 14:07:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: by netcom1.netcom.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id D5068113F72; Wed,  7 Mar 2001 11:07:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike Harding <mvh@ix.netcom.com>
To: dillon@earth.backplane.com
Cc: ggross@symark.com, steve@megahack.com, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
In-reply-to: <200103071856.f27Iuxl71513@earth.backplane.com> (message from
	Matt Dillon on Wed, 7 Mar 2001 10:56:59 -0800 (PST))
Subject: Re: ARCH flag in new make.conf
References: <01C0A6F1.C26E6DC0.ggross@symark.com> <200103071856.f27Iuxl71513@earth.backplane.com>
Message-Id: <20010307190719.D5068113F72@netcom1.netcom.com>
Date: Wed,  7 Mar 2001 11:07:19 -0800 (PST)
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


I've been bugging Kris about this for a while - I don't care about the
-march stuff, but the openssl optimizations are pretty much a
requirement when you have an SSL server... it doubles the RSA speed.

- Mike H.

   Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 10:56:59 -0800 (PST)
   From: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>
   Cc: Steven Farmer <steve@megahack.com>,
	   "freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG" <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
   Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
   X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG
   Precedence: bulk

   :The impression I get is that when people use it, they usually end up 
   :complaining to the list about something not working, and then it is
   :not immediately obvious that broken optimization routines are the problem.  On 
   :the basis of a dialogue I read about 6 months ago on this list,
   :I decided to avoid it like the plague until the current version of gcc 
   :stabilizes somewhat.  Does that make sense, or am I being overly cautious?

       I think you are being entirely sensible.   I used to use -O2 all the time,
       but as of about a year ago it started breaking things (starting with
       the FreeBSD kernel).  Then I started using -Os because I like the code
       compaction it produced, but that started breaking the kernel too.  Now I
       just use -O (and -O had damn well better continue to work because my
       static inlines will not compile properly without it!).

       Now I just don't care any more, except for the 0.1% of my personal code
       that I need to optimize, and most of that I optimize simply by playing
       around with the C a little or changing an algorithm out or something like
       that.

						   -Matt

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


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