From owner-freebsd-current Thu Mar 16 12:20:15 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from dt051n0b.san.rr.com (dt051n0b.san.rr.com [204.210.32.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 206AD37C2E2 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2000 12:20:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Received: from slave (doug@slave [10.0.0.1]) by dt051n0b.san.rr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA16779; Thu, 16 Mar 2000 12:20:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 12:20:00 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Barton X-Sender: doug@dt051n0b.san.rr.com To: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" Cc: Christian Weisgerber , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gcc -Os optimisation broken (RELENG_4) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.20000316132120.00af5ce0@207.227.119.2> 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 Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Jeffrey J. Mountin wrote: > Wondering why one would use -mcpu and not -march. If the code runs only on > Celerons, PII's, and PIII's why would one *not* use -march. > > I'm curious about (possible) breakages with -mcpu or -march compared to -Ox > settings which seem to break things more often than -O. Only ask, since > -Ox and individual flags (rather than the mulititude added going from -O to > -O2) are used far more often. Eager to fire my new-found gun in the direction of my feet I built world and kernel last night with -0s -march=pentium. So far so good (although I haven't given it a real workout yet). Now that I now 'pentiumpro' should be a better choice, I'll give that a whirl tonight. After reading the man page I had to agree with your point that -march seemed like a better option, and I don't have cross-platform issues to deal with here. Doug -- "While the future's there for anyone to change, still you know it seems, it would be easier sometimes to change the past" - Jackson Browne, "Fountain of Sorrow" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message