Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance

From: Roger Larsson (roger.larsson@skelleftea.mail.telia.com)
Date: Thu Feb 06 2003 - 18:17:17 EST

Next message: James Bottomley: "Re: Broken SCSI code in the BK tree (was: 2.5.59-mm8)"
Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance"
In reply to: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance"
Next in thread: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance"
Reply: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thursday 06 February 2003 21:38, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> gcc-3.2
>
> 2901299 vmlinux.O2
> 2667827 vmlinux.Os
>

In an earlier message, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
>
> 894822 Feb 5 23:50 /boot/vmlinuz-2.5.59-mjb3-Os
> 906203 Feb 5 22:46 /boot/vmlinuz-2.5.59-mjb3.old

And if you compare both with same/no compression?

/RogerL

-- Roger Larsson Skellefteå Sweden

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

Next message: James Bottomley: "Re: Broken SCSI code in the BK tree (was: 2.5.59-mm8)"
Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance"
In reply to: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance"
Next in thread: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance"
Reply: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: gcc -O2 vs gcc -Os performance"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 22:00:22 EST