> Hi Christophe, Hi Rohit,
> I think we had this discussion on "-Os" Vs "-O2" (size vs speed) long > time back for super-fast booting. I believe we can reach midway if > Kernel compilation is done using "-O2" and the rest is compiled with > "-Os". I agree. Also main C library aka Glibc is build wirh -02. Maybe also note that cook respect packages CFLAGS so our -Os can and is overwrite many time. Like in the kernel, on can see some -O3 as weel as in other pkgs. > From phoronix , you can see that in some cases "-Os" works better in > performance than "-O2" ( > http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/index.php?k=profile&u=staalmannen-231-8340-1312). > The reason is that "-Os" produces small executables and the CPU takes > lesser time to move data around cache. The new intel chips, however, > now contain pre-caching to improve performance gains for "bigger" > executables produced by "-O2". So, as Alexander points out that > playing with cache size parameters may be really helpful too. I will have a look to lto! > It is also possible that some binaries may not compile with "-Os". Yes I know and actually some dont cross compile so I use the native i486 compiler for --build. - Christophe --- SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/
