Subject: Re: Another ELF issue
To: David Laight <email@example.com>
From: Richard Earnshaw <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/14/2002 19:41:53
> I don't see how knowing that malloc() returns an 8 byte (or greater)
> aligned pointer helps the compiler unless it knows that (almost)
> all 8 byte items are aligned.
It doesn't hugely. However, if the compiler can track the lifetime of a
value returned by malloc, and it knows the alignment of that pointer, then
it can make use of that. Further, you can use extensions that over-align
some objects, such as
double a __attribute__((aligned(8)));
or what-ever the syntax is. That variable will then maintain 8-byte
alignment and the compiler can make use of that.
> The procedure calling convention is problematical, especially for
> var-args functions and printf() - is the format string required to
> use all the arguments?
No. But it must un-marshall them from left-to-right along the statement
that created the var-args call.
> If the stack is aligned, then the compiler knows the alignment of fp
> parameters. If they are misaligned and their address is taken then
> then presumably an aligned copy must be made.
> Can you take the address of a varags parameter?
I don't see why not.
> > > Maybe gcc should issue a warning whenever it misaligns items within
> > > a structure? Can it remember which items ought to be aligined?
> > I don't think that would be sensible either.
> What does --strict-align do?
Never heard of it.