From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 03:45:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 03:45:19 -0500 Received: from willy.net1.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:39173 "EHLO www.home.local") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 03:45:18 -0500 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 09:52:29 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: David Zaffiro Cc: willy@w.ods.org, linux-kernel Subject: Re: Compiling x86 with and without frame pointer Message-ID: <20021125085229.GA15592@alpha.home.local> References: <19005.1037854033@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> <20021121050607.GA1554@mark.mielke.cc> <3DDCA7C9.9040501@netscape.net> <20021121192045.GE3636@alpha.home.local> <3DE1E384.8000801@netscape.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3DE1E384.8000801@netscape.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Anyway it makes me wonder, whether kernelcompilation shouldn't be > configurable between a "optimize for (compressed image) size" and a > "optimize for speed" option... I'd go for speed... (and always omitting > frame-pointers doesn't seem to as fast as omitting them only in leaf > functions). hehe :-) I've put this in my kernels for about 2 years now. You can also reduce the image size with -malign-jumps=0 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 and -mcpu=i386. I also use some other options, but don't have them at hand right now. But it basically gives me slightly smaller kernels, which is pretty good for install CD or diskettes. Cheers, Willy