X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 09:03:39 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: Eric Rudd <rudd AT cyberoptics DOT com>
Message-Id: <7458-Sat09Feb2002090339+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <10202082038.AA22206@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject: Re: Alignment problem
References:  <10202082038 DOT AA22206 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 14:38:02 -0600 (CST)
> 
> I think we should increase the alignment to 8 bytes when we get around
> to it since it does have a huge impact on some operations (such as
> floating loads/stores).

Agreed.

> I haven't looked at our malloc() at all, but if it uses before and 
> after longword boundary tags then 8-byte alignment doesn't waste
> any memory either (just potentially 4 bytes after a new sbrk()).

Yes, that's what I think, too.

Eric, would you like to work on this?  It sounds like you are ``the
most motivated individual'' right now ;-)