Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261258AbVAPPkR (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:40:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261267AbVAPPkR (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:40:17 -0500 Received: from lakermmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.240.33]:30346 "EHLO lakermmtao06.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261258AbVAPPkN (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:40:13 -0500 From: Steve Snyder To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Testing optimize-for-size suitability? Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:40:12 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200501161040.12907.swsnyder@insightbb.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 873 Lines: 20 Is there a benchmark or set of benchmarks that would allow me to test the suitability of the CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE kernel config option? It seems to me that the benefit of this option is very dependant on the amount of CPU cache installed, with the compiler code generation being a secondary factor. The use, or not, of CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE is basically an act of faith without knowing how it impacts my particular environment. I've got a Pentium4 CPU with 512KB of L2 cache, and I'm using GCC v3.3.3. How can I determine whether or not CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE should be used for my system? Thanks. - 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/