Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:08:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:41:38 -0400 Received: from zeus.kernel.org ([204.152.189.113]:27041 "EHLO zeus.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:41:24 -0400 To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: Con Kolivas , root@chaos.analogic.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] Corrected gcc3.2 v gcc2.95.3 contest results References: <1032791089.3d8f2431231ac@kolivas.net> <20020923103417.V21220@devserv.devel.redhat.com> From: mru@users.sourceforge.net (=?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=) Date: 23 Sep 2002 18:03:17 +0200 In-Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek's message of "Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:34:17 -0400" Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Channel Islands) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 748 Lines: 14 Jakub Jelinek writes: > BTW: Have you tried gcc 3.2 with say -finline-limit=2000 too? > By default gcc 3.2 has for usual C code smaller inlining cutoff, so the IO > difference might as well be because some important, but big function was > inlined by 2.95.x and not by 3.2.x. On the other side there is > __attribute__((always_inline)) which you can use to tell gcc you don't > want any cutoff for a particular function. How about using -Winline? -- M?ns Rullg?rd mru@users.sf.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/