linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] [x86]: Compiler Option Os is better on latest x86

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 27 Jan 2013 21:38:13 +0800
From:	Ling Ma <ling.ma.program@...il.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ma Ling <ling.ml@...pay.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] [x86]: Compiler Option Os is better on latest x86

Hi Ingo

Thanks for your correcting.
Because thinking of  most of 32bit CPU belong to low-end CPUs(smaller
cache), they should more  emphasize  i-cache miss, I chose Os for
them.
I will test it and send out result ASAP.

Regards
Ling

2013/1/27, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>:
>
> * ling.ma.program@...il.com <ling.ma.program@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> In this version we also append CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE for i386.
>
> Were those measurements done on i386 as well? I'd be content
> with keeping the current minimal - and mostly documentary -
> patch that only does this on 64-bit. I just wanted to record the
> current benchmark numbers mostly.
>
> Also see the discussion with Linus - this is by no far an
> unconditionally good option and we'll probably have to wait for
> more GCC action (-Ok or so) before being able to enable size
> optimizations everywhere without unacceptable trade-offs.
>
> 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/