On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 11:33:13PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2004-08-25 17:07, Gary Kline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > But Q1: how exactly, does one get rid of the debugging stuff?
>
> You can disable most of the debugging stuff with:
>
> # /bin/rm -fr /etc/malloc.conf
> # ln -s ajr /etc/malloc.conf
>
> and then commenting our or deleting the following options from your
> kernel config file:
>
> %%%
> makeoptions DEBUG=-g # Build kernel with gdb(1) debug symbols
> options KDB # Enable kernel debugger support.
> options DDB # Support DDB.
> options GDB # Support remote GDB.
> options INVARIANTS # Enable calls of extra sanity checking
> options INVARIANT_SUPPORT # Extra sanity checks of internal structures,
> required by INVARIANTS
> options WITNESS # Enable checks to detect deadlocks and cycles
> options WITNESS_SKIPSPIN # Don't run witness on spinlocks for speed
> %%%
I'll hack KERNCONF; thanks for the howto's and wherefor's:)
But not until there is a 5.3-STABLE! ...Catchind deadlocks
and not checking on spinlocks is likely wise, though.
>
> Disabling all of these is certainly going to yield a faster system.
>
> > And Q2, now that we've got gcc-3.4, would it help to use a higher
> > opyimization? say, "-O3"? ....
>
> I'm not sure if the speed gain is significant and worth the risk.
> I still use the same make.conf settings, shown below:
>
> NO_CPU_CFLAGS= true # Don't add -march=<cpu> to CFLAGS automatically
> NO_CPU_COPTFLAGS=true # Don't add -march=<cpu> to COPTFLAGS automatically
>
> and I have commented out the CFLAGS and COPTFLAGS, the same way I did a
> year ago and two years ago, etc.
>
I'l cn run my own test suites to see; you're probably
right abut the speed gain, but it'll be a worthy test of
gcc/g++.
gary
--
Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public service Unix
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
