From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 4 03:13:49 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A97F16A4CE for ; Sun, 4 Jul 2004 03:13:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6C2F43D3F for ; Sun, 4 Jul 2004 03:13:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) id i643DlFn088976; Sat, 3 Jul 2004 22:13:47 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan) Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 22:13:47 -0500 From: Dan Nelson To: Marc UBM Bocklet Message-ID: <20040704031347.GJ6574@dan.emsphone.com> References: <20040703231027.GA74329@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040704001816.GA91326@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040704024416.4b9463df.ubm@u-boot-man.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040704024416.4b9463df.ubm@u-boot-man.de> X-OS: FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT X-message-flag: Outlook Error User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ACPI-CA 20040527 import X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 03:13:49 -0000 In the last episode (Jul 04), Marc UBM Bocklet said: > Hmm, what I've been wondering for some time: Is there a perceivable > performance gain by using -Ox instead of -O? For most programs, yes. They also affect compilation time. Scott Robert Ladd has been running analyses of the various gcc optimization flags for quite a while, and has some comparison tables. http://www.coyotegulch.com/acovea/ -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com