This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Revised mips alignment patches.
- To: Geoff Keating <geoffk at ozemail dot com dot au>
- Subject: Re: Revised mips alignment patches.
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 14:34:06 -0700
- Cc: egcs-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gavin at cygnus dot com, law at cygnus dot com, davem at redhat dot com
- References: <199908310640.QAA00974@gluttony.geoffk.wattle.id.au> <19990831120956.A11638@cygnus.com> <199909010539.PAA00963@gluttony.geoffk.wattle.id.au>
On Wed, Sep 01, 1999 at 03:39:16PM +1000, Geoff Keating wrote:
> Unfortunately, the semantics of ASM_OUTPUT_MAX_SKIP_ALIGN is that it
> either aligns it to the power of two that you asked for, or it does
> _no alignment at all_ if the next boundary is too far. So you have to
> emit two alignment directives anyway. I guess if
> ASM_OUTPUT_MAX_SKIP_ALIGN was not defined, you'd avoid outputting two
> .align directives, but this is not the usual case.
>
> Also, it'd complicate the implementation of -fno-align-functions.
Ug. Ok. I didn't think about that.
r~