Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1999/04/28/13:46:14
DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure whether 32-byte alignment is the best option, but the waste
>
> 8-byte alignment is my vote. Note that a global alignment is wrong,
> because ctor/dtor tables will get corrupted if they're padded.
>
> > Another related question is, what is the guaranteed alignment from malloc?
>
> malloc returns pointers that are guaranteed to be sufficiently aligned
> for any use. Of course, on the ix86, any alignment is "sufficient".
> However, djgpp's current malloc aligns to 8-byte boundaries.
I vote for 16 bytes. Why? 128 bits data path is 16 bytes and some seconds ago
I taked a look into a Win32 program (almost sure is a VC++ one) and I saw
upto 14 NOPs, so it looks like 16 bytes is what they use for code.
Of course you can see the bloat in the code, it is full of NOPs. Also: NOP is
not the only one used, but is very easy to see with an Hexa editor.
SET
------------------------------------ 0 --------------------------------
Visit my home page: http://welcome.to/SetSoft
or
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552/
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer)
Alternative e-mail: set-soft AT usa DOT net set AT computer DOT org
ICQ: 2951574
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA
TE: +(5411) 4759 0013
- Raw text -