------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-06
19:07 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> Subject: RE: optimized code seg faults due to double load on sparcV9
>
> I don't think so. Malloc does not guarantee anything but mod-4
> alignment. You have to use memalign to get something better (at least
> on a Sun). I only did the +4 pointer stuff to ensure that the double
> would be misaligned mod8, as this is what was happening in my code. As
> long as I am on a mod4 boundary for my struct, the -munaligned-doubles
> flag should force the handling of doubles as though they are unaligned.
> The compiler with no optimization does this. But as soon as you turn on
> -O1, it ignores the unaligned-doubles directive.
Again what you said about malloc is not true and has not been true since 1989.
The C standard says malloc aligns things the largest alignment required for
that machine. In this case
doubles are aligned by 8. So your code is invalid.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21389
