[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 16:48:49 +0300
From: Dmitry Golovin <dima@...ovin.in>
To: "musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] prefer Oz optimization if the compiler supports it
In theory Oz should produce slimmer binary than Os, but I want first to perform tests to see how optimization level really affects size and performance.
Regards,
Dmitry
19.07.2017, 15:52, "Rich Felker" <dalias@...c.org>:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 01:44:17PM +0300, Dmitry Golovin wrote:
>> Hi all!
>>
>> This is a very small and simple patch, it adds support for Oz level
>> of optimization (clang supports it). Since the kernel switched to
>> Oz, I think it's a good idea to use it as long as the compiler
>> supports it, on the other hand I didn't test if it has any
>> advantages in case of musl.
>>
>> The patch is attached.
>
> I'm not clear what the goal is. Why would Oz be preferred to Os? A
> quick search shows that all it seems to do is disabling some
> vectorization, which sounds undesirable.
>
> Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
