Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/01/28/03:56:24
On Jan 28 01:33, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 03:06:44PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> >According to Dave Korn on 1/27/2006 9:34 AM:
> >>Nope, don't worry about it, that's a bit of a red-herring. By default,
> >>the code gcc generates is good for everything from '486 up. The
> >>instruction scheduling and choice of which instructions to use may be
> >>tuned to be optimal for a 686 and so may be less-than-optimal on a
> >>'586, but there should not be any actual backward-compatibility issues.
> >
> >Speaking of which, should the next release of cygwin gcc be configured
> >to generate code tuned for 686, rather than penalizing most modern CPUs
> >with 386-compatible but slower code sequences?
>
> Why do you assume that this is not already the case? I use i686-pc-cygwin
> as the target for everything that I build and I use a i686-pc-cygwin-gcc
> cross compiler.
Same here, same for the net distro itself. AFAIK we're generating
i686-opimized code by default for at least three years, don't we?
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -