Re: [OT] Re: code bloat [was Re: Semaphore assembly-code bug]

[Ken Moffat]

On Sat, 30 Oct 2004, Alan Cox wrote:

> On Sul, 2004-10-31 at 00:20, Lee Revell wrote:
> > I think very few application developers understand the point Linus made
> > - that bigger code IS slower code due to cache misses.  If this were
> > widely understood we would be in pretty good shape.
>
> On my laptop both Openoffice and gnome are measurably faster if you
> build the lot with -Os (except a couple of image libs)
>

Depends how much of gnome you use.  I used to swear by -Os for
non-toolchain stuff, but in the end I got bitten by gnumeric on x86.
http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128834 is similar, but in my case
opening *any* spreadsheet would cause gnumeric to segfault (gcc-3.3
series).  Add in the time spent rebuilding gnome before I found this bug
report, and adding extra parts of gnome just in case I missed something,
and the time to load it is irrelevant.  Since then I've had an anecdotal
report that -Os is known to cause problems with gnome.  I s'pose people
will say it serves me right for doing my initial testing on ppc which
didn't have this problem ;)  The point is that -Os is *much* less tested
than -O2 at the moment.

Ken
-- 
 das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce

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