Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Andrew Gaydenko wrote: I have noticed, the official portage tree has included gcc 4.2. Now for Core 2 Duo CPU (amd64 Gentoo arch) I use in make.conf file: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=nocona -pipe gcc' changelog has this note: ... IA-32/x86-64 * -mtune=generic can now be used to generate code running well on common x86 chips. This includes AMD Athlon, AMD Opteron, Intel Pentium-M, Intel Pentium 4 and Intel Core 2. * -mtune=native and -march=native will produce code optimized for the host architecture as detected using the cpuid instruction. ... The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? I have a Core2 Duo E6600 and use these CFLAGS with GCC 4.2: CFLAGS=-Os -march=native -mtune=native -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mmmx -msse2 -msse3 Native works fine here. -- Kenneth Prugh - Ken69267 Gentoo AMD64 Arch Tester signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Andrew Gaydenko schrieb: I have noticed, the official portage tree has included gcc 4.2. Now for Core 2 Duo CPU (amd64 Gentoo arch) I use in make.conf file: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=nocona -pipe gcc' changelog has this note: ... IA-32/x86-64 * -mtune=generic can now be used to generate code running well on common x86 chips. This includes AMD Athlon, AMD Opteron, Intel Pentium-M, Intel Pentium 4 and Intel Core 2. * -mtune=native and -march=native will produce code optimized for the host architecture as detected using the cpuid instruction. ... The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? Here you will find additional information http://tinyurl.com/2b6spk. It is stated there that you can use either -march=cpu-type or -mtune=cpu-type and that -march=cpu-type implies -mtune=cpu-type. I think you can also use the nocona option for the cpu-type until gcc 4.3 is out which brings you -march=core2, see here http://tinyurl.com/ottvh. Using mtune or march depends on where you want to use your compiled software, if you only want to use it only on your own machine -march=native is probably the best option and if you want to use it on other machines too, you should choose -mtune=native. If you don't know at all the weather the cpu is IA32 AMD64 or EM64T you should use -mtune=generic. Maybe someone could explain it better, but this is what i understand! Regards, Daniel -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Hello Andrew Gaydenko, The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? You CAN change them but there's no MUST about it. I've been running GCC 4.2 with -march=nocona for about ten days and it's working well. -- Neil Bothwick Linux like wigwam. No windows, no gates, Apache inside. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? I have a Core2 Duo E6600 and use these CFLAGS with GCC 4.2: CFLAGS=-Os -march=native -mtune=native -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mmmx -msse2 -msse3 Native works fine here. Kenneth, thanks! I'll try your flags-string. I hope, there aren't any resons to rebuld anything else after switching form 4.1.2 with curennt flags to 4.2.0 with youe flags. Is it true? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
On Freitag, 20. Juli 2007, Andrew Gaydenko wrote: I have noticed, the official portage tree has included gcc 4.2. Now for Core 2 Duo CPU (amd64 Gentoo arch) I use in make.conf file: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=nocona -pipe gcc' changelog has this note: ... IA-32/x86-64 * -mtune=generic can now be used to generate code running well on common x86 chips. This includes AMD Athlon, AMD Opteron, Intel Pentium-M, Intel Pentium 4 and Intel Core 2. * -mtune=native and -march=native will produce code optimized for the host architecture as detected using the cpuid instruction. ... The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? first of all: using mtune AND march is stupid Second, that 'feature' means that gcc looks at your CHOST and use that for the march/mtune setting. So no, don't change anything at all. march=nocona is fine. Don't touch it. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Am Freitag 20 Juli 2007 20:16 schrieb Kenneth Prugh: Andrew Gaydenko wrote: I have noticed, the official portage tree has included gcc 4.2. Now for Core 2 Duo CPU (amd64 Gentoo arch) I use in make.conf file: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=nocona -pipe gcc' changelog has this note: ... IA-32/x86-64 * -mtune=generic can now be used to generate code running well on common x86 chips. This includes AMD Athlon, AMD Opteron, Intel Pentium-M, Intel Pentium 4 and Intel Core 2. * -mtune=native and -march=native will produce code optimized for the host architecture as detected using the cpuid instruction. ... The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? I have a Core2 Duo E6600 and use these CFLAGS with GCC 4.2: CFLAGS=-Os -march=native -mtune=native -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mmmx -msse2 -msse3 Native works fine here. I don't think that you need -msse3 -msse2 and -mmmx because -march takes care of that (refer to man gcc, one notable exeption: -march=athlon64 does not pull -msse3 in because not all Athlons support it). -fomit-frame-pointer is unneccessary on AMD64 (refer to man gcc, again). pgpuTgRS3tYhK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: Second, that 'feature' means that gcc looks at your CHOST and use that for the march/mtune setting. So no, don't change anything at all. march=nocona is fine. Don't touch it. That's completely wrong. If you look at the old patch [1] that fixed mtune for the Core2's you'd see it is MUCH more complicated than that. [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-12/msg00061.html -- Kenneth Prugh - Ken69267 Gentoo AMD64 Arch Tester signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Florian Philipp wrote: Am Freitag 20 Juli 2007 20:16 schrieb Kenneth Prugh: Andrew Gaydenko wrote: I have noticed, the official portage tree has included gcc 4.2. Now for Core 2 Duo CPU (amd64 Gentoo arch) I use in make.conf file: CFLAGS=-O2 -march=nocona -pipe gcc' changelog has this note: ... IA-32/x86-64 * -mtune=generic can now be used to generate code running well on common x86 chips. This includes AMD Athlon, AMD Opteron, Intel Pentium-M, Intel Pentium 4 and Intel Core 2. * -mtune=native and -march=native will produce code optimized for the host architecture as detected using the cpuid instruction. ... The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? I have a Core2 Duo E6600 and use these CFLAGS with GCC 4.2: CFLAGS=-Os -march=native -mtune=native -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mmmx -msse2 -msse3 Native works fine here. I don't think that you need -msse3 -msse2 and -mmmx because -march takes care of that (refer to man gcc, one notable exeption: -march=athlon64 does not pull -msse3 in because not all Athlons support it). -fomit-frame-pointer is unneccessary on AMD64 (refer to man gcc, again). Yeah I wasn't exactly positive if it did pull everything in, and specifying specifically can't really hurt at all as long as you know it's supported with your cpu. -- Kenneth Prugh - Ken69267 Gentoo AMD64 Arch Tester signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
march and mtune together? stupid. native when you know your CPU? Does your CHOST say 'x86_64' or nocona? mmmx, msse2, mss3 stupid. Its all part of nocona (maybe not msse3 but everything else). And fomit-frame-pointer? AFAIK superfluos on the amd64 architecture, which was copied by intel - so it should be superfluos on nocona. I think nocona is not a valid CHOST. For 32bit use CHOST=i686-pc-linux-gnu and for 64bit use CHOST=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu @ Andrew Gaydenko Take a look here http://gentoo-wiki.com/Safe_Cflags#Intel_Core_2_Duo.2FQuad_.2F_Xeon_51xx.2F53xx i think this settings should be used until gcc-4.3 is out! So your current settings should do it until that happens! Regards, Daniel -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Andrew Gaydenko wrote: The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? I have a Core2 Duo E6600 and use these CFLAGS with GCC 4.2: CFLAGS=-Os -march=native -mtune=native -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mmmx -msse2 -msse3 Native works fine here. Kenneth, thanks! I'll try your flags-string. I hope, there aren't any resons to rebuld anything else after switching form 4.1.2 with curennt flags to 4.2.0 with youe flags. Is it true? Personally I rebuilt everything on my system because I wanted everything to be compiled under my shiny new toolchain. I accomplished it via this: # emerge -eav system # emerge -eav world However, I don't believe you _have_ to rebuild. GCC 4.1 and 4.2 should be binary compatible. I know that my GCC 4.1 LibTorrent works fine with a GCC 4.2 built rtorrent, so I would like to say it should work fine. -- Kenneth Prugh - Ken69267 Gentoo AMD64 Arch Tester signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
On Friday 20 July 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo': If they have the same value, or -march is listed after -mtune, yes. -march implies -mtune, but you might do something like -march=686 -mtune=native -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Kenneth Prugh wrote: Andrew Gaydenko wrote: The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? I have a Core2 Duo E6600 and use these CFLAGS with GCC 4.2: CFLAGS=-Os -march=native -mtune=native -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mmmx -msse2 -msse3 Native works fine here. Kenneth, thanks! I'll try your flags-string. I hope, there aren't any resons to rebuld anything else after switching form 4.1.2 with curennt flags to 4.2.0 with youe flags. Is it true? Personally I rebuilt everything on my system because I wanted everything to be compiled under my shiny new toolchain. I accomplished it via this: # emerge -eav system # emerge -eav world However, I don't believe you _have_ to rebuild. GCC 4.1 and 4.2 should be binary compatible. I know that my GCC 4.1 LibTorrent works fine with a GCC 4.2 built rtorrent, so I would like to say it should work fine. I have a script that you can run that rebuilds everything only once and it is a complete bottom to top rebuild. No need to do a system then world this way. I got it off the forums and I have used it a few times and it works very well for me so far. If you want it, I can send it to you off list or post it here for everybody that wants to save a copy. I have not used it in a while so I'm not sure if portage changes may have made it not work anymore. Let me know. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Freitag, 20. Juli 2007, Andrew Gaydenko wrote: march and mtune together? stupid. mmmx, msse2, mss3 stupid. Its all part of nocona (maybe not msse3 but everything else). Yes, that's right. These flags don't need to be set again. But there are some ebuilds that filter certain flags like march. By this filtering the package would be compiled without mmx and msse2 if the flags aren't set again. If they are, the package will still be compiled *with* mmx and msse2 even though march is filtered.. Yes, the filtering in the ebuild isn't done just for fun but some people still prefer to have mmx and msse2 enabled (when march is filtered). In short, settings these flags is not completley stupid but has a reason (even though it's not a very good one). :) And then Os. That is a big nono. Why? I have a complete system running with -Os here and it's working fine. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
On Freitag, 20. Juli 2007, Tobias Heinlein wrote: Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Freitag, 20. Juli 2007, Andrew Gaydenko wrote: march and mtune together? stupid. mmmx, msse2, mss3 stupid. Its all part of nocona (maybe not msse3 but everything else). Yes, that's right. These flags don't need to be set again. But there are some ebuilds that filter certain flags like march. By this filtering the package would be compiled without mmx and msse2 if the flags aren't set again. If they are, the package will still be compiled *with* mmx and msse2 even though march is filtered.. Yes, the filtering in the ebuild isn't done just for fun but some people still prefer to have mmx and msse2 enabled (when march is filtered). In short, settings these flags is not completley stupid but has a reason (even though it's not a very good one). :) stupid is meant as 'uninformed' not imbecile in that case. But yes, choice of words was not good in my part. And then Os. That is a big nono. Why? I have a complete system running with -Os here and it's working fine. because Os is known for miscompilations and it makes stuff slower a lot. For example picture resizing in gwenview. Fast with O2, unbearable slow with Os. Last tried with gcc 4.1 ;) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kenneth Prugh wrote: Andrew Gaydenko wrote: The question is: must I replace '-march=nocona' with '-mtune=native and -march=native'? I have a Core2 Duo E6600 and use these CFLAGS with GCC 4.2: CFLAGS=-Os -march=native -mtune=native -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mmmx -msse2 -msse3 Native works fine here. Kenneth, thanks! I'll try your flags-string. I hope, there aren't any resons to rebuld anything else after switching form 4.1.2 with curennt flags to 4.2.0 with youe flags. Is it true? Personally I rebuilt everything on my system because I wanted everything to be compiled under my shiny new toolchain. I accomplished it via this: # emerge -eav system # emerge -eav world However, I don't believe you _have_ to rebuild. GCC 4.1 and 4.2 should be binary compatible. I know that my GCC 4.1 LibTorrent works fine with a GCC 4.2 built rtorrent, so I would like to say it should work fine. You, of course, remembered to change your default compiler with # gcc-config CHOST-gnu-4.2.0 before recompiling everything. (Run 'gcc-config' with no arguments for more info.) - --- Vladimir -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGoTGSEo/yvZUwubMRApXJAJ4oTGTglnyFwwESe3XmY6vEUemq6wCfdLhU +CgZTtunvWDOY7pVGWltwik= =zs86 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
Vladimir G. Ivanovic wrote: snip You, of course, remembered to change your default compiler with # gcc-config CHOST-gnu-4.2.0 before recompiling everything. (Run 'gcc-config' with no arguments for more info.) --- Vladimir Yep. I've also seen that with march/mtune set to native, GCC 4.1.2 fails to compile anything (here at least), so it's a bit hard to make that mistake. -- Kenneth Prugh - Ken69267 Gentoo AMD64 Arch Tester signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc 4.2 and Core 2 Duo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kenneth Prugh wrote: Vladimir G. Ivanovic wrote: snip You, of course, remembered to change your default compiler with # gcc-config CHOST-gnu-4.2.0 before recompiling everything. (Run 'gcc-config' with no arguments for more info.) --- Vladimir Yep. I've also seen that with march/mtune set to native, GCC 4.1.2 fails to compile anything (here at least), so it's a bit hard to make that mistake. Duh. I should have realized that native had no chance of working on any version prior to 4.2.0 and so my reminder wasn't needed. - --- Vladimir -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGoX4FEo/yvZUwubMRAgkFAJ9wHxdGjV5Adstc91/V+Kp0PuuPOACfaLO1 E7yfaY4cgD6tQ5hVklrFU44= =hN1b -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
