"Johan Kullstam" <kullstam@ne.mediaone.net> writes:
> Matthias Andree <ma@dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de> writes:
>
> > Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:
> >
> > > Because the only difference between -O2 and -O3 is -finline-functions,
> > > which is bad for the kernel sources (which wants to control inlining
> > > explicitly).
> >
> > Which could OTOH be defeated explicitly by means of
> > -fno-inline-functions, could not it?
>
> sure, but what exactly would be the point? the compile command line
> is already long enough without this completely gratuitous bloat.
And it would be gratuitous. Unlike -O2, which switches on optimizations
that are not controllable by any -f flag, the *only* effect of -O3 is to
turn on -finline-functions. So doing -O3 when you don't want automatic
function inlining is wrong.
-- `People's needs are not `finance'. You can't eat a bank.' --- Alan Rosenthal- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 21:00:18 EST