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
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
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
Precedence: bulk

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