This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

write.c (subsegs_finish): Don't specially align last subseg.

Why was this code removed?
Not saying it shouldn't have been, just asking.

Has the "proper nop-filling" been achieved via other means?
Was the "proper nop-filling" the wrong thing to do?

[I scanned the subject lines of list traffic for May
but didn't see anything that stood out as relating to this.]

2002-05-13  Alan Modra  <>

	* write.c (subsegs_finish): Don't specially align last subseg.

Index: write.c
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gas/write.c,v
retrieving revision 1.54
retrieving revision 1.55
diff -c -p -r1.54 -r1.55
*** write.c	1 May 2002 00:33:09 -0000	1.54
--- write.c	13 May 2002 01:23:51 -0000	1.55
*************** subsegs_finish ()
*** 1441,1452 ****
           if we are generating a listing.  */
        alignment = had_errors () ? 0 : SUB_SEGMENT_ALIGN (now_seg);
-       /* The last subsegment gets an aligment corresponding to the
- 	 alignment of the section.  This allows proper nop-filling
- 	 at the end of code-bearing sections.  */
-       if (!frchainP->frch_next || frchainP->frch_next->frch_seg != now_seg)
- 	alignment = get_recorded_alignment (now_seg);
        if (subseg_text_p (now_seg))
  	frag_align_code (alignment, 0);
--- 1441,1446 ----

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]