On 09/13/2016 04:24 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
But we could define TARGET_ABSOLUTE_BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT on nvptx instead of on x86; is this OK?
That's what I had in mind. It would be good if Thomas or Nathan could give this patch a spin, I'm not currently really set up for it. But it looks like a reasonable try to me.
I'm still not sure why you need an alignment cap on nvptx, but I'm not going to worry about it anymore. :)
I think it was the cfgexpand machinery that uses dynamic allocations when a variable has a bigger alignment than the stack, and you really don't want these on ptx.
Bernd
