1 |
On Sunday 15 July 2001 03:54, you wrote: |
2 |
> A few comments I've been meaning to make. |
3 |
> |
4 |
> 1. According to the GCC documentation you shouldn't be using -m<processor> |
5 |
> any more. It's been depreciated in favor of -mcpu<processor>. |
6 |
I know that. The mpentium etc. flags wre in the originl make.conf, the things |
7 |
I added were -march=x -mcpu=x. I'll change mpentium for march=pentium if I |
8 |
haven't already. |
9 |
|
10 |
> |
11 |
> 2. You don't need to use -mcpu usually with -march as -march sets -mcpu |
12 |
> for you. I say usually 'cause there's an AMD processor (can't remember |
13 |
> which) that uses a different instruction set than the default set by the |
14 |
> -march it uses. |
15 |
I think you're wrong. If I say march=i486 mcpu=i586 this means the binary |
16 |
will run on any 486 or better, but is optimized for the 586. |
17 |
|
18 |
|
19 |
> |
20 |
> 3. The usage of processor names has been depreciated as well. Should |
21 |
> use i586, etc. instead. |
22 |
For intel processors maybe. However AMD's k6, though a 586, is better than a |
23 |
Pentium, and the Athlon, though a 686, is better than a Pentium3. |
24 |
|
25 |
Although it really would be better if gcc allowed for flags of instruction |
26 |
sets etc. so that you could define your 'custom processor' by saying, use |
27 |
MMX+3DNow!2+sse. Than we'd know exactly what optimization it was doing. |
28 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
Dan Armak |