Date:	Wed, 7 Jul 1999 15:17:21 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
cc:	salvador <salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com,
	Robert Hoehne <robert DOT hoehne AT gmx DOT net>
Subject:	Re: .align directives in libc.a
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.A41.4.05.9907062151210.57466-100000@ieva01.lanet.lv>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990707151637.2851H-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Andris Pavenis wrote:

> > Can GCC be configured or told at run time which filler to use for 
> > alignment?
> > 
> > For that matter, can it be told to emit a smarter align directive, like 
> > ".balign 16,0xcc,7"?
> 
> It's not so simple.

Too bad.  Does the third number (7) in the alignment directive also
requires changes in GCC sources?

I hoped that EGCS would handle this better, since alignment is
important in latest Intel chips.  I'm surprised that EGCS development
didn't add this functionality, because this isn't specific to DJGPP,
every x86-based platform needs it.

> That should
> be normally fixed in binutils but that can be done for DJGPP with
> development snapshots only which is not acceptable for ordinary user.

What is missing from the official release of Binutils, that requires
the development snapshots?

> If we specify filler in target related config. files we should make
> sure filler will be used only where needed. That would require much
> grepping gcc sources, and more likely modifications to cc1, cc1plus etc

Perhaps it is worth to discuss this in the EGCS development forum.
They obviously making a lot of efforst to generate faster code, so I
would expect them to favor ideas that make the alignment of the code
better.  If they like it, maybe they will solve this problem for us.

- Raw text -