Re: -Os versus -O2

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, 24 Jun 2007, Arjan van de Ven wrote:

On Sun, 2007-06-24 at 18:08 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

on a system level, size can help performance because you have more
memory available for other things.  It also reduces download size and
gives you more space on the live CD....

if you want to make things bigger again, please do this OUTSIDE the
"optimize for size" option. Because that TELLS you to go for size.

then do we need a new option 'optimize for best overall performance' that
goes for size (and the corresponding wins there) most of the time, but is
ignored where it makes a huge difference?

that isn't so easy. Anything which doesn't have a performance tradeoff
is in -O2 already. So every single thing in -Os costs you performance on
a micro level.

this has not been true in the past (assuming that it's true today)

ok, if you look at a micro-enough level this may be true, but completely ignoring things like download times, the optimizations almost always boil down to trying to avoid jumps, loops, and decision logic at the expense of space.

however recent cpu's are significantly better as handling jumps and loops, and the cost of cache misses is significantly worse.

is the list of what's included in -O2 vs -Os different for different CPU's? what about within a single family of processors? (even in the x86 family the costs of jumps, loops, and cache misses varies drasticly)

my understanding was that the optimizations for O2 were pretty fixed.

The translation to macro level depends greatly on how things are used
(you even have to factor in download times etc)... so that is a fair
question to leave up to the user... which is what there is today.

ignore things like download time for the moment. it's not significant to most people as they don't download things that often, and when they do they are almost always downloading lots of stuff they don't need (drivers for example)

users are trying to get better performance 90+% of the time when they select -Os. That's why it got moved out of CONFIG_EMBEDDED.

David Lang

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux