Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Mon, 13 Jan 2003 17:37:48 -0500 (EST) | From | "Albert D. Cahalan" <> | Subject | Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*? |
| |
Matti Aarnio writes:
> Advanced optimizer hinting features, like unlikely() attribute > are very new in (this) compiler, and while they in theory move the > "unlikely" codes out of the fast-path, such things have been buggy > in the past, and we are worried of bug effects...
I've been wondering about this as the goto-thread spewed by.
As I recall, gcc recently started moving basic blocks around. This destroyed most of the careful goto-based optimizations. Now we're supposed to use likely() and unlikely() instead.
Hmmm?
BTW, what I'd like is a way to change optimization settings on a per-function or even per-block basis. Telling gcc to unroll a specific loop or pack a function into a tiny space would be really cool. __attribute__((__opt__("-Os"))) I could go for an "assume default case can't happen" too. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |