Re: Questions about optimisation options

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Questions about optimisation options
From: Stefan Ring via Gcc-help <gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 16:01:44 +0200
In-reply-to: <5af08a88-3729-4257-8c21-91bb7b3ec6e5@aa.net.uk>
References: <c8840edd-be02-423e-b2c7-62c3f0c3935c@aa.net.uk> <20250603160212.GM30295@gate.crashing.org> <c383a52f-abfb-601a-9e50-c81fe5f0827e@aa.net.uk> <20250603205754.GO30295@gate.crashing.org> <5af08a88-3729-4257-8c21-91bb7b3ec6e5@aa.net.uk>
Reply-to: Stefan Ring <stefanrin@xxxxxxxxx>

On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 10:11 AM Tim Froggatt via Gcc-help
<gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 1) Why is m=1 different from m=2,3,4? Because I thought ARM32 instructions
> were always 4-byte aligned. Shouldn't they produce the same code?

Not if you use -mthumb

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Questions about optimisation options
  - From: Tim Froggatt via Gcc-help

References:
- Questions about optimisation options
  - From: Tim Froggatt via Gcc-help
- Re: Questions about optimisation options
  - From: Segher Boessenkool
- Re: Questions about optimisation options
  - From: Tim Froggatt via Gcc-help
- Re: Questions about optimisation options
  - From: Segher Boessenkool
- Re: Questions about optimisation options
  - From: Tim Froggatt via Gcc-help

Prev by Date: Re: Questions about optimisation options
Next by Date: Re: Questions about optimisation options
Previous by thread: Re: Questions about optimisation options
Next by thread: Re: Questions about optimisation options
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux C Programming] [Linux Kernel] [eCos] [Fedora Development] [Fedora Announce] [Autoconf] [The DWARVES Debugging Tools] [Yosemite Campsites] [Yosemite News] [Linux GCC]

Powered by Linux