This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] PR opt/6627: New target macro MINIMUM_FUNCTION_BOUNDARY
- From: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 13:05:10 -0600 (MDT)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR opt/6627: New target macro MINIMUM_FUNCTION_BOUNDARY
On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Roger Sayle wrote:
> Infact this is the only other use of FUNCTION_BOUNDARY in CVS,
> so this would contradict your claim that this is used in
> optimizations.
My apologies. Its the only other use in the machine independent
code. There are numbers of uses in the GCC backends. However,
as each backend defines the meaning of FUNCTION_BOUNDARY as either
the architecture minimum or the preferred alignment, these uses
are safe as long as they are consistent.
Sorry for my earlier haste.
Does the IA-64 ABI really require all function entry points to be
16 byte aligned?
Roger
--