Re: Alignment of small memory allocations returned by malloc(3)

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:55:13PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:48:15PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > I still don't see the point of the GCC behavior and I don't agree with
> > the standard interpretation.
> 
> For alpha, at least, the change makes a lot sense and improves code
> significantly.
> 
> The standard language is poor, but the answer to the DR clearly states
> "any object". The real point here would be to tell them "this is an error
> in the standard", and once they agree and change it, we can reconsider.

Yes, the standard language is poor. But that is no excuse for making
bogus assumptions on the part of GCC, especially if it is knowingly
breaking existing software.  IMO that part of tree-ssa-ccp.c should be
backed out until a conclusion from the C WG comes in.

Joerg