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?

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
Cc: iant at google dot com, hubicka at ucw dot cz, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 10:46:51 -0800
Subject: Re: ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?
References: <200702222340.l1MNeNbC018989@greed.delorie.com> <20070222234930.GE14919@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <200702230033.l1N0XxP2028591@greed.delorie.com> <m31wkhr8h2.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <20070223180612.GB4351@redhat.com> <200702231842.l1NIgguG016033@greed.delorie.com>

On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 01:42:42PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> I like the "min (256, MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT)" fix...

So do I.

> 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.

Yep.


r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?
  - From: DJ Delorie

References:
- ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: ix86_data_alignment: bad defaults?
  - From: DJ Delorie

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]