From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gary Thomas To: Colin Ford Cc: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com, bartv@redhat.com Subject: Re: [ECOS] waitpid and alarm? Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 07:46:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <200101161536.PAA08774@colinf.pipinghotnetworks.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-01/msg00263.html On 16-Jan-2001 Colin Ford wrote: > Thanks for the info Bart. The only thing is that I was put off somewhat > by the gcc info on the two option -ffunction-sections and > -fdata-sections, > see the last paragraph below: > > @item -ffunction-sections > @itemx -fdata-sections > Place each function or data item into its own section in the output > file if the target supports arbitrary sections. The name of the > function or the name of the data item determines the section's name > in the output file. > > Use these options on systems where the linker can perform optimizations > to improve locality of reference in the instruction space. HPPA > processors running HP-UX and Sparc processors running Solaris 2 have > linkers with such optimizations. Other systems using the ELF object format > as well as AIX may have these optimizations in the future. > > Only use these options when there are significant benefits from doing > so. When you specify these options, the assembler and linker will > create larger object and executable files and will also be slower. > You will not be able to use @code{gprof} on all systems if you > specify this option and you may have problems with debugging if > you specify both this option and @samp{-g}. > > > Nice to know what you think of this? > Hogwash? Honestly, the text is probably quite old and certainly does not reflect our experience in using these options with eCos.