Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261523AbVAPPrC (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:47:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261395AbVAPPrC (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:47:02 -0500 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([205.233.218.70]:63249 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261523AbVAPPqv (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:46:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Testing optimize-for-size suitability? From: Arjan van de Ven To: Steve Snyder Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <200501161040.12907.swsnyder@insightbb.com> References: <200501161040.12907.swsnyder@insightbb.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:46:43 +0100 Message-Id: <1105890403.8734.20.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.1 (++++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on canuck.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (4.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.3 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains a numeric HELO 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1158 Lines: 23 On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 10:40 -0500, Steve Snyder wrote: > 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? it also saves 400 kb of memory that can be used by the pagecache now... that doesn't show in a microbenchmark but it's a quite sizable gain if you remember that a disk seek is 10msec..that is a LOT of cpu cycles.. - 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/