This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

RE: Once more THUMB suboptimal code

From: "Eugene Starokoltsev" <eugene_o at gmx dot net>
To: <crossgcc at sources dot redhat dot com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:32:39 +0400
Subject: RE: Once more THUMB suboptimal code
Reply-to: <eugene_o at gmx dot net>

> > I use arm-ecos-elf-gcc v. 3.1 to compile C++ code. The compiler
> options are
> >
> > -g  -Os -mthumb -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -nostartfiles
> -Wa,-ahlms=$test.lst
> >  -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions
>
> -Os optimises for size not for speed, is this what you wanted?

Really with -O2 option the result is the same. But I think that excessive
moves increase both execution time and size of the code. Am I right?


------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com

References:
- Re: Once more THUMB suboptimal code
  - From: Paul Whitfield

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]