This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.

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: [PATCH] x86: Set optimize to INT_MAX for -Os

From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich at suse dot com>
Cc: Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 09:43:33 +0800
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Set optimize to INT_MAX for -Os
References: <20190316235033.26752-1-hjl.tools@gmail.com> <5C8F8264020000780021FD1A@prv1-mh.provo.novell.com>

On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 7:35 PM Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On 17.03.19 at 00:50, <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Set optimize to INT_MAX, instead of -1, for -Os so that -Os will include
> > -O2 optimization.
>
> I didn't think -Os should be a superset of -O2. Iirc it's not for e.g.
> gcc. Why would this be a good idea? Judging by the PR it should
> rather be the doc to get changed imo.

-Os was designed to include -O2.

-- 
H.J.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] x86: Set optimize to INT_MAX for -Os
  - From: Jan Beulich

References:
- [PATCH] x86: Set optimize to INT_MAX for -Os
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: [PATCH] x86: Set optimize to INT_MAX for -Os
  - From: Jan Beulich

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