On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 06:15:45PM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:54 PM, André Ramaciotti da Silva
> <andre.ramaciotti@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:06:32PM +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> >> Sascha Siegel schrieb:
> >> >Hi,
> >> >
> >> >can someone tell my whats the reason for building the arch-kernel
> >> >with "# CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE is not set"?
> >> >
> >> >Thank you!
> >>
> >> Optimizing for size sacrifices performance. Read the gcc
> >> documentation about the -O{1,2,3,s} options.
> >>
> >
> > I don't know if it is as simple as that. I recall reading somewhere that
> > under certain circumstances a binary optimized with -Os is faster than a
> > binary optimized with -O2.
> >
> > The reason for this is that a smaller binary may load faster than a big
> > one and cause less page faults.
>
> I really doubt the kernel is even close to the boundary for something like this
Agreed, especially as the kernel is loaded only once. I just went a little
bit off-topic while still on-topic. :)
