Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 09:28:19 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka AT ta DOT jcu DOT cz>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Stack alignment
In-Reply-To: <19990725134331.A9005@tabor.ta.jcu.cz>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990726092758.27650A-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 25 Jul 1999, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> Also about binutils alignment.. I believe alignment is set to prety
> low number there..

The subsection alignment is 4 bytes in current port of Binutils.

> next (after 2.95) version will need 32 byte alignment for AMD-K6 code
> (to fit well into cache lines)

I believe we are heading for 16-byte alignment for the next version of
Binutils.  This should be enough for all processors, including AMD-K6,
since the prefetch queues fetch on 16-byte boundaries.  Is there
something in AMD-K6 that makes this not good enough?

Anyway, as long as GCC doesn't align the code on 32-byte boundary by
default, there's not much sense in aligning subsections on 32-byte
boundary, is there?