Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 00:10:39 +0200 To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: What types of optimizations are present for the K6? Message-ID: <19990511001039.K22062@cerebro.laendle> Mail-Followup-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com References: <37374C32 DOT 4D12565A AT home DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <37374C32.4D12565A@home.com>; from Graham TerMarsch on Mon, May 10, 1999 at 02:14:26PM -0700 X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.2.7 (root AT cerebro) (gcc driver version pgcc-2.93.09 19990221 (gcc2 ss-980929 experimental) executing gcc version 2.7.2.3) From: Marc Lehmann Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Mon, May 10, 1999 at 02:14:26PM -0700, Graham TerMarsch wrote: > Have been trying out pgcc here on my K6-III system to see if I could actually > see any performance improvement out of optimizing my compiles for this > processor. I've tried '-mk6' and '-march=k6', but have only found the effect > that it actually generates _slower_ code than egcs-1.1.2 does. > > So, uh, wanted to find out a bit more about what types of optimizations we're > doing for K6 processors, and find out if anyone had other tips on cmd line A different scheduling is used for the k6. > FWIW, both the 'gzip' and 'xfree86' compiles were done with '-O2' for both > egcs and pgcc compiles. pgcc should be almost identical to egcs if only -O2 is used. Check the FAQ! -- -----==- | ----==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e| -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | |