From:	pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
Message-ID:	<B0000095010@stargate.astr.lu.lv>
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Fri, 16 Jul 1999 15:25:47 +0300
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: gcc-2.95 19990714 prerelease)
In-reply-to:	<378E329D.7EF36A6E@inti.gov.ar>
X-mailer:	Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11)
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 15 Jul 99, at 16:12, salvador wrote:

> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:
> >
> > > I also didn't enable HAIFA scheduler or changed away from default
> > > alignments. Perhaps these things are for gcc-3.0
> >
> > I would rather suggest to switch to 16-byte alignment now.  It seems that
> > gcc 2.96 already does that anyway, at least on Linux.
> 
> Also in DOS, is confirmed. But is not good idea to align inside functions, not
> even in Intel Pentium processors.

Therefore I think that we should wait gcc-3.0 for that. I tested that 
with gcc-2.95 19990714 also in Linux 16-byte alignment is not 
used. 


> > It would be nice to have the next GCC and Binutils configured for 16-byte
> > code alignment.
> 
> Yes, but for entry points of functions.
> 

Andris

- Raw text -