[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization
From: |
Joerg Wunsch |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization |
Date: |
Thu, 17 Oct 2002 13:14:43 +0200 (MET DST) |
"Tvrtko A. Ursulin" <address@hidden> wrote:
> Nothing about -09 which I found was used in some Makefiles floating
> around the net ?
You can even write -O999 and it won't become more than -O3. ;-) Some
people blindly believe by just writing something there, they'll indeed
get better code as long as the compiler doesn't complain about it...
Even -O3 can already become a pessimization (it tries to inline very
much), and the frequently found -mcpu=pentiumoftheday switches were
often happy if they would optimize at least 1 % better (in terms of
overall execution speed)...
In terms of code size, i found that AVRs are usually best with just
-O1 (perhaps plus some micro-optimization in -f or -m options). Even
-Os is usually already larger.
--
J"org Wunsch Unix support engineer
address@hidden http://www.interface-systems.de/~j/
avr-gcc-list at http://avr1.org
- [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, Tvrtko A. Ursulin, 2002/10/11
- RE: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, Dean Ferreyra, 2002/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, E. Weddington, 2002/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, Tvrtko A. Ursulin, 2002/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, Lorne Gutz, 2002/10/23
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, E. Weddington, 2002/10/23
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, Tvrtko A. Ursulin, 2002/10/23
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, Joerg Wunsch, 2002/10/23
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, E. Weddington, 2002/10/23
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, Joerg Wunsch, 2002/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] More on optimization, Theodore A. Roth, 2002/10/11