delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Tue, 8 Jun 1999 10:18:45 -0400 |
Message-Id: | <199906081418.KAA21495@envy.delorie.com> |
From: | DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
CC: | pavenis AT lanet DOT lv, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
In-reply-to: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.990608112824.4197B-100000@is> (message from Eli |
Zaretskii on Tue, 8 Jun 1999 11:28:44 +0300 (IDT)) | |
Subject: | Re: egcs-19990602 (gcc-2.95 prerelease) binaries for testing |
References: | <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 990608112824 DOT 4197B-100000 AT is> |
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 |
> Some time ago we had a thread here about alignment of data sections in > DJGPP executables. As far as I remember, the conclusion was that we > want to increase the alignment to 32 bytes. Does this have any > relation to the compiler (as opposed to Binutils), and if so, does > this snapshot do the Right Thing? Alignment requires help from the compiler and the linker, although I suspect the linker will do the right thing by default (align the sections themselves). 8 bytes seems to be where people are heading. Going further doesn't add much to performance, but wastes a lot of cycles due to the larger size of the memory space. We currently use 4 bytes. Note that this is for a section-level alignment; things like ints and pointers would still only need 4-byte alignment, but we'd want long longs and doubles to be 8-byte aligned.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |