On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:11:04 +0300 (EEST) Dimitrios Apostolou <ji...@gmx.net> wrote:
> I got no replies, so I guess there is no will to move GCC to -O3 by > default, so I shouldn't bother submitting a patch? > > As a reminder, cc1 is 0-4% faster but almost 10% bigger executable. > Testsuite showed no regression. Bootstrap time is greater (don't have the > numbers) but I proposed adding and documenting a "make release" target > that would be used by distros, while default target would remain -O2 (or > even -O1) so that our test builds complete in sensible time. > > In the future we could also turn on other stable ways to speed up GCC for > release builds (e.g. lto/profiledbootstrap). My concern would be that any bugs triggered by -O3 would not be found until after a release is made and everyone has gone off to work on the trunk. We usually encounter a couple of bugs that only appear with --disable-checking every release cycle because no one uses it. -- gcc-porting we were never more here, expanse getting broader toolchain, wxwidgets though bigger boats been done by less water @ gentoo.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
