From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Nov 6 10:35:06 1996 Return-Path: owner-chat Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA00625 for chat-outgoing; Wed, 6 Nov 1996 10:35:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA00577 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 1996 10:34:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from horst.bfd.com (horst.bfd.com [204.160.242.10]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id JAA13757 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 1996 09:50:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from harlie (bastion.bfd.com [204.160.242.2]) by horst.bfd.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA07250; Wed, 6 Nov 1996 09:48:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 09:48:29 -0800 (PST) From: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" X-Sender: ejs@harlie To: Softweyr LLC cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Positive note on XFree86 In-Reply-To: <199611061727.KAA00752@xmission.xmission.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 6 Nov 1996, Softweyr LLC wrote: > > I Pentium optimized it on the > > standard GCC 2.7.2.1 with the following C compiler optimizations: > > > > -O2 -malign-loops=0 -malign-jumps=0 > > Why, exactly, are you *maligning* loops and jumps? They seem like like > perfectly normal programming constructs to me. ;^) When compiling with -m486, gcc pads loop and other program structures to better take advantage of the 486 cache and memory interface. The P5 cache and memory interface doesn't benefit from this, so he's turning it back off. Of course, I could be partially or even totally wrong.