[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] What has changed between WinAVR 20070525rc2andWinAVR

From: Bob Paddock
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] What has changed between WinAVR 20070525rc2andWinAVR 20080430?
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 14:36:29 -0400

On 5/13/08, Preston Wilson <address@hidden> wrote:
> "Bob Paddock" wrote:
> >>
> >> FYI, I just released WinAVR 20080512 that contains a patch from Anatoly
> >> that fixes this problem.
> The other item you noted was code size increase, and I did not see (I could
> have missed it) anyone address that issue.

4.1.2/20070525rc2   33658
4.3.0/20080430:       34174
4.3.0/20080512:       34182

I expected the increase between 20080430 and 20080512 due to the nature
of saving more registers.  The 516 byte  increase between 20070525 and now
is more of the disappointment, but the price of bug fixes.  With this project
I still have 49% of the Flash free so it a none issue to me right now.

> Anatoly Sokolov suggested, in another thread or two on the avr-gcc list,
> using the gcc option "--param inline-call-cost=N"
> Where N is between 1 and 7
> I found that for the one project that I have going now where size really
> matters, that N=3 is giving me the smallest binary.  Oddly with
> WinAVR-20080430 N=2 gave the smallest binary.

Alas the boss has "Ship by X" on the schedule, not "put randomg settings
in to the tools to see what happens".  There would also the the "whole
program optimization" setting to try, someday, most likly when the
boss says "you can fit this one more feature in the part you have" for
the X time...  Personally putting random setting in is far more fun.

Anyway of doing "-Osmallest" without doing it by hand on each project?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]