Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:54:15 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: noackjr@alumni.rice.edu Cc: "Russell D. Murphy Jr." <rdmurphy@vt.edu> Subject: Re: Mozilla crash and burn? Message-ID: <20040323175415.0b6e1bf2@Magellan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <40605576.3080604@alumni.rice.edu> References: <16479.30826.56912.226587@knock.econ.vt.edu> <20040322180728.F5352@carver.gumbysoft.com> <20040323121441.1e535e57@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <1080050628.777.2.camel@gyros> <20040323153753.4805898a@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <40605576.3080604@alumni.rice.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:19:18 -0600
Jon Noack <noackjr@alumni.rice.edu> wrote:
> I hope this isn't a stupid question, but why -Os instead of -O?
-Os enables more optimizations than -O, but only those which don't
increase the size too much. -O2 (and -O3) enable optimizations which may
increase the size, this may results in code, which doesn't fit into the
L1 (or L2) caches of a CPU anymore. Not running in the caches anymore
result in a slowdown (if it's critical code).
Bye,
Alexander.
--
I will be available to get hired in April 2004.
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net
GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040323175415.0b6e1bf2>