[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130127124942.GB3933@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 13:49:42 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>, ling.ml@...pay.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/defconfig: Turn on
CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE= y in the 64-bit defconfig
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 11:43 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > The problem, of course, is that most -O2 code generation is done
> > assuming hot loops that don't show much if any I$ issues. And the -Os
> > thing is done *purely* for size, not taking any performance into
> > account at all. There's no balanced middle ground, which is what _we_
> > would want.
>
> Gcc needs to implement a -Olinus
What we really want is a sane default for 'library code'
optimization:
- cache-cold optimizations for run-through-once non-looping
code (-Os)
- good loop optimizations for anything that arguably loops (-O2)
- plus common-sense fixes to -Os like not throwing away
explicit branch hints we go to great pains to insert.
Possibly some time this decade.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists