Re: A patch for linux 2.1.127

Marc Lehmann (pcg@goof.com)
Tue, 10 Nov 1998 18:51:51 +0100

On Mon, Nov 09, 1998 at 02:16:52PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 1998 at 03:39:14PM -0600, kwrohrer@ce.mediaone.net wrote:
> > Why not just recommend "-O6 -fno-inline-functions" like we did with the
> > strength reduction bug?
>
> Because that is exactly -O2. Unless you are using pgcc, which has
> its own idea about the world, there are three levels of optimization

The main reason for -O6 in pgcc is that I can easier test for bugs in egcs,
i.e. if pgcc breaks with -O2 -finline-functions its most certainly a bug in
egcs. There is nothing wrong with -O99 and such..

OTOH, it seems pgcc firmly set the magical -O6 into the minds of the people,
and I can see that this is not the best thing ;(

-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@goof.com |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|

-
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/