[Top] [All Lists]

Re: gcc-2.96-nn status

To: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>, Alan Eldridge <alane@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: gcc-2.96-nn status
From: Joseph Fannin <jhf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 21:15:55 -0400
Cc: SGI XFS Dev List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <>
References: <> <>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 13:27, Seth Mos wrote:
> At 13:19 18-9-2001 -0400, Alan Eldridge wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 07:14:47PM +0200, Seth Mos wrote:
> > >At 12:40 18-9-2001 -0400, Alan Eldridge wrote:
> > >I can, altough it does not have as many optimizations. So I only think
> > > that the runtime speed would be affected. The linux kernel already
> > > knows what a Athlon processor is and what to do with it. I think this
> > > makes a larger difference then the compiler.
> >
> >Umm, how? rpm --target athlon causes gcc to be invoked with -march=athlon,
> >which kgcc knows nothing about so it dies.
> You can specify a target of i686 and have a kernel config for athlon/duron
> systems

    kgcc / egcs doesn't have k6 optimizations either. :-(  Yet the kbuild 
scripts somehow know this and use -march=i586 when -march=k6 is not 
available.  I'm sure the same test could be created for the athlon, and would 
be accepted into the kernel, but no one has bothered to do it.

Joseph Fannin

"Bull in pure form is rare; there is usually some contamination by data."
    -- William Graves Perry Jr.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>