On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 09:05 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 07:53 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 11:30 +0900, Warren Togami wrote: > > > >> > Going off at a tangent....what would people think of the idea of > >> > switching to -Os in $RPM_OPT_FLAGS _after_ FC5 is released? > >> > >> If it results in some form of improvement in performance, I'm all for > >> it. > > > > The "s" in -Os stands for "size", not for "speed". So if -Os compiled > > code-execution is faster than the default CFLAGS, something must be > > broken elsewhere. > > That's not true. Yes, -Os stands for size. However code size _can_ > translate to performance increase. True, but this would mean -Os rsp. RPM_OPT_FLAGS having missed the objectives they have been designed for. But note that I referred to code execution speed, not application performance. > Think about cache footprint, etc. > Smaller code means more can fit in the cache. It also results in a > smaller DRAM footprint for thinks like shared libraries, etc. Right, there are other components interfering but the compiler's code generation (prelink, shared-libraries, kernel, suboptimal code, cpu performance, memory performance etc., etc.) on application performance Identifying and keeping these issues apart, however is difficult. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
