>
> Andrew Pinski wrote:
> I have no idea how your reply is related to my question about the
> change in alignment of char arrays between gcc-3.4 and gcc-4.1.
It was not really a rely to that part of the question but rather the
assertion in general that unaligned access was slower which is not tr
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 20:04 -0800, Michael Eager wrote:
But unaligned char arrays make strcpy much slower.
Actually it depends on the processor unless you are messed up by using
-mstrict-align which is a huge hammer for most (if not all) PowerPC
processors even though the
On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 20:04 -0800, Michael Eager wrote:
> But unaligned char arrays make strcpy much slower.
Actually it depends on the processor unless you are messed up by using
-mstrict-align which is a huge hammer for most (if not all) PowerPC
processors even though the few cases which need an
With powerpc-eabi-gcc, I noticed that there's been a small
change between gcc-3.4 and gcc-4.1 in how automatic char arrays
are allocated.
In gcc-3.4, char arrays are aligned on word boundaries.
In gcc-4.1, they are aligned on byte boundaries.
For example:
void foo() {
char a[31];
char b[31]
