Re: i386 code label alignment patch (version 2)

[john at feith dot com (John Wehle)]

> Note that there is no longer any VERSION file in the gas directory.
> You do need to check configure.in and Makefile.in.

I understand that.  What I meant by checking for VERSION in ../gas
was check for VERSION in the appropriate files in ../gas.

> I see what you mean about the checking the assembler in a single tree
> build.  Perhaps in that specific case you should check configure.in
> and Makefile.in, and otherwise do a feature test.

So the current logic is acceptable assuming that I use feature tests
and check for VERSION in the correct files?

> I can't help but wonder if there is some other approach entirely.
> Using .p2align is only interesting for a target for which gcc does not
> define ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGN correctly.  I don't mean to make you retread
> old ground, but I wonder what targets those are?  Is it feasible to
> get gcc to define ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGN correctly?  Or is the problem that
> the definition of .align changed in gas?

The specific problem is that I need the version of .p2align which supports
specifying the maximum bytes to skip in order to implement code label
alignments on the i386 according to Intel recommendations.  Redefining
ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGN was just a nicety I did to be consistent as long as I
was checking to see what alignment instructions were supported by the
assembler.  Being able to define ASM_OUTPUT_MAX_SKIP_ALIGN is the
real goal.

-- John
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   Feith Systems  |   Voice: 1-215-646-8000  |  Email: john@feith.com  |
|    John Wehle    |     Fax: 1-215-540-5495  |                         |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------