| Re: Packages build, news and bugs |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/slitaz Archives
]
> Hi Christophe,
Hi Rohit,
> I think we had this discussion on "-Os" Vs "-O2" (size vs speed) long
> time back for super-fast booting. I believe we can reach midway if
> Kernel compilation is done using "-O2" and the rest is compiled with
> "-Os".
I agree. Also main C library aka Glibc is build wirh -02. Maybe also
note that cook respect packages CFLAGS so our -Os can and is overwrite
many time. Like in the kernel, on can see some -O3 as weel as in other
pkgs.
> From phoronix , you can see that in some cases "-Os" works better in
> performance than "-O2" (
> http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/index.php?k=profile&u=staalmannen-231-8340-1312).
> The reason is that "-Os" produces small executables and the CPU takes
> lesser time to move data around cache. The new intel chips, however,
> now contain pre-caching to improve performance gains for "bigger"
> executables produced by "-O2". So, as Alexander points out that
> playing with cache size parameters may be really helpful too.
I will have a look to lto!
> It is also possible that some binaries may not compile with "-Os".
Yes I know and actually some dont cross compile so I use the native
i486 compiler for --build.
- Christophe
---
SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/