Message-Id: <199903181530.KAA01307@indy3.indy.net>
From: "Steve Snyder" <ssnyder AT indy DOT net>
To: "EGCS Mailing List" <egcs AT cygnus DOT com>,
        "PGCC Mailing List" <pgcc AT delorie DOT com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 10:29:24 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: PMMail 2.00.1500 for OS/2 Warp 4.00
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Questions on inlining of code
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com

Two question on inlining of code in egcs/pgcc:

1. Is it possible to disable automatic inlining (compiler switches -O3 or 
-finline) while still respecting the inline declaration in the source code?
I'd like to compile with max optimization (-O6) while avoiding the bloat 
that comes with aggressive inlining of code.  At the same time, though, I 
don't want to disabled the inlining of code explicitly declared as such.

2. Does aggressive inlining of code make any sense on a Pentium+ CPU?
It obviously helps on a 386/486 by avoiding the call/return instructions. 
I wonder, though, if the inlining of code doesn't just thrash the L2 cache 
on more recent processors.  Given the prevalence these days of 512kb L2 
caches, maybe inlining should not be automatically enabled by higher levels
of optimization?

Thank you.


*** Steve Snyder ***