This is the mail archive of the newlib@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the newlib project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
On Tue, 9 Dec 1997, Jonathan Larmour wrote: > Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > I thought I would pass this on. Does the new version of memcpy do much > > better than this? > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: Tue, 9 Dec 97 12:03:28 -0600 > > From: Eric Norum <eric@skatter.USask.Ca> > > To: rtems-list@oarcorp.com > > Subject: Re: memcpy performance > > > > It's even worse than just a byte-by-byte copy! > > > > On the 971024 snapshot (gen68360 BSP) a call to memcpy produces: > [...a lot of unnecessary wastefulness] > > Is he compiling with -O? If so, then gcc should include its own builtin > memcpy instead of the newlib one AIUI. > > This may not be true for that target possibly. Anyone know? This complaint is about code generated for a call inside RTEMS. We always compile at the highest optimization level which does not cause gcc to core dump or generate incorrect code. :) For the target board Eric uses (68360), that means RTEMS is compiled with: -m68020 -mnobitfield -msoft-float -O4 -fomit-frame-pointer I will verify the toolset and args just in case though. --joel