From owner-freebsd-current Mon Apr 5 23:14:55 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from adelphi.physics.adelaide.edu.au (adelphi.physics.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.36.247]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12AFF15013 for ; Mon, 5 Apr 1999 23:10:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au) Received: from bragg (bragg [129.127.36.34]) by adelphi.physics.adelaide.edu.au (8.8.8/8.8.8/UofA-1.5) with SMTP id PAA05117; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 15:39:11 +0930 (CST) Received: from localhost by bragg; (5.65/1.1.8.2/05Aug95-0227PM) id AA04424; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 15:38:59 +0930 Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 15:38:59 +0930 (CST) From: Kris Kennaway X-Sender: kkennawa@bragg To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Alex Zepeda , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: EGCS optimizations In-Reply-To: <199904060525.WAA04269@apollo.backplane.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 5 Apr 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote: > There is nothing beyond -O2. Well, there's -O3, which tries to > inline static functions, but that typically isn't beneficial because > it really bloats up the code and subroutine calls on intel cpus are > very fast. When I tested this last year, -O3 on egcs produced a 10-15% slowdown for things like 'gzip'. OTOH, gcc's -O3 produced slightly faster code (as I recall). I /do/ however see noticeable (10-20%) speed improvements using -O2 -mpentium -march=pentium compared to -O2 -mno-486 on gcc. Kris ----- The Feynman problem-solving algorithm: 1. Write down the problem 2. Think real hard 3. Write down the solution To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message