delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
Date: | Sat, 09 Feb 2002 09:03:39 +0200 |
From: | "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
Sender: | halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il |
To: | Eric Rudd <rudd AT cyberoptics DOT com> |
Message-Id: | <7458-Sat09Feb2002090339+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> |
X-Mailer: | emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 |
CC: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
In-reply-to: | <10202082038.AA22206@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu) |
Subject: | Re: Alignment problem |
References: | <10202082038 DOT AA22206 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 14:38:02 -0600 (CST) > > I think we should increase the alignment to 8 bytes when we get around > to it since it does have a huge impact on some operations (such as > floating loads/stores). Agreed. > I haven't looked at our malloc() at all, but if it uses before and > after longword boundary tags then 8-byte alignment doesn't waste > any memory either (just potentially 4 bytes after a new sbrk()). Yes, that's what I think, too. Eric, would you like to work on this? It sounds like you are ``the most motivated individual'' right now ;-)
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |