2015-06-22 09:47, Cyril Chemparathy:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:36:20 +0200
> Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>
> > 2015-06-19 10:34, Cyril Chemparathy:
> > > On machines that are strict on pointer alignment, current code
> > > breaks on GCC's -Wcast-align checks on casts from narrower to wider
> > > types.
2015-06-19 10:34, Cyril Chemparathy:
> On machines that are strict on pointer alignment, current code breaks
> on GCC's -Wcast-align checks on casts from narrower to wider types.
> This patch introduces new unaligned_uint(16|32|64)_t types, which
> correctly retain alignment in such cases.
[...]
>
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:36:20 +0200
Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-06-19 10:34, Cyril Chemparathy:
> > On machines that are strict on pointer alignment, current code
> > breaks on GCC's -Wcast-align checks on casts from narrower to wider
> > types. This patch introduces new unaligned_uint(16|32|64)
On machines that are strict on pointer alignment, current code breaks
on GCC's -Wcast-align checks on casts from narrower to wider types.
This patch introduces new unaligned_uint(16|32|64)_t types, which
correctly retain alignment in such cases.
This is currently unimplemented on ICC and clang, an
4 matches
Mail list logo