On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:53:31AM +0100, Andy Polyakov wrote: > > to facilitate building openssl on the x86_64 platform I suggest to apply > > the attached patch. > > > +"linux-x86_64", "gcc:-DL_ENDIAN -DNO_ASM: > > Linux/x86_64 suports two ABIs. As far as I understand it's perfectly > possible to compile gcc so that it supports both. Which one will be > default? To ensure that intended ABI is chosen I'd recommend to add -m64 > to command line.
The 64-bit environment is the default. The compiler seems to know... we don't use -m64 explicitely. > Why don't you use -O? I had no problem with -O3 and gcc-3.2... We use -O2 but I hand it over on the command line, because compilers are unsteady guys.... I have heard bad things about -O3, like making binaries slower and larger. -O2 is what has been tested most, it seems. > As for NO_ASM. Do you have real x86_64 hardware? I have been working on > BN assembler aided implementation that would need some benchmarking. It > should give around 3x speed-up... If you have real hardware is it > possible to get an account? I'll see how I can get you in contact with someone, Peter -- Gravity is an unforgiving motherfucker.
msg14175/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
