This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?

> I thought BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT was the largest alignment that the
> processor ever requires for any data type.  Which is not the
> same thing, since this is alignment desired for performance.

Since varasm complains when alignment exceeds MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT, and
MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT defaults to BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT, any time we align
to something bigger than BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT we need to be careful,
then.  I like the "min (256, MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT)" fix, because that
does what we currently do, except when it would complain, then it
doesn't.

Note that elfos.h defines MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT so big that it is
effectively unlimited, so no elf target would ever trip over these
types of bugs.
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]