Adjust omp-low test for alignment

[Richard Henderson]

On 11/28/2011 08:49 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Nov 2011, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> The m68k-linux failure for the various omp atomic tests
>> is due to the fact that BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT is 16 bits on
>> that platform.  I think it's pretty reasonable to assume
>> that if something is aligned to BIGGEST_ALIGNEMENT, then
>> it can be considered "aligned".
> 
> BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT means aligned enough for normal access, but
> not necessarily for atomic access.

If that's true, then you'll have problems applying any of these
functions without additional source-code level alignment, everywhere.

> Not that OMP support is imminent or critical for cris-linux or
> anything, but can we have a new macro?

I'm not sure what you're suggesting that the macro actually do.


r~