On Tuesday 17 May 2005 00:07, Joe Buck wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 10:15:29PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote: > > On Monday 16 May 2005 20:26, Karel Gardas wrote: > > > On Mon, 16 May 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote: > > > > Just for the record, attached is gcctest's history of the overall > > > > memory requirement at -O[0123] for combine.i, insn-attrtab.i, and > > > > generate.ii (aka PR8361). Honza's bot has been sending these > > > > reports since Septemper 2004, so that's where I started. > > > > > > Is it possible to also add -Os to your tested option set? IMHO this > > > option is quite necessary for embedded developers who seems to complain > > > in this thread. > > > > Not interesting. -Os is basically -O2 with some passes disabled. > > That's not quite correct. For example, the rule -Os uses for considering > inlining is completely different (inlining is allowed when the size of > generated code does not increase).
...meaning that the memory footprint at -Os is going to be smaller than the -O2 print for all but a few strange cases. Gr. Steven
