Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 02:36:55 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Donn Miller <dmmiller@cvzoom.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gcc -Os optimisation broken (RELENG_4) Message-ID: <20000316023655.B64165@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <38D08ADF.9C28C61E@cvzoom.net>; from dmmiller@cvzoom.net on Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 02:18:55AM -0500 References: <38CF48CF.59A100D7@altavista.net> <8ap8qe$hvj$1@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de> <38D08908.C629B55E@gorean.org> <38D08ADF.9C28C61E@cvzoom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I think that 'pentium' would result in code that isn't as optimized as > 'pentiumpro', but I've heard that 'pentium' has a lot less problems. What??? 'pentiumpro' code isn't going to be very optimized for a Pentium (if it even runs at all). > I've heard that -mpentiumpro can be pretty buggy, and it can actually > result in slower code than -mpentium for certain pentium types. Yea like the original P5 Pentiums. You should match the command line with your actual machine if you are going to use these options. -- -- David (obrien@NUXI.com) 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?20000316023655.B64165>