This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.

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

Re: ARM alignment options?

From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
To: Daniel Ezekiel <Daniel dot Ezekiel at ubinetics dot co dot in>
Cc: "'Gregor Dreijer'" <GDREIJER at SUN dot AC dot ZA>, "'crossgcc at sources dot redhat dot com'" <crossgcc at sources dot redhat dot com>, Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 15:29:54 +0100
Subject: Re: ARM alignment options?
Organization: ARM Ltd.
Reply-to: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com

> have u tried this option in gcc
> <snip from info gcc>
> `DATA_ALIGNMENT (TYPE, BASIC-ALIGN)'
>      If defined, a C expression to compute the alignment for a
>      variables in the static store. 
Note, *in static store*.  Basically, all this does is puts entire objects 
at more aligned starting points so that the compiler can improve certain 
copy operations, or so that a cache-line fetch will be more efficient (ie 
the required value will be likely fetched first).

It does not change the layout of types, so will not eliminate use of byte 
and half-word operations by the compiler.

R.



------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com

References:
- RE: ARM alignment options?
  - From: Daniel Ezekiel

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