Hi Jeff,
>> gcc/
>> * common.opt (flimit-function-alignment): New.
>> * doc/invoke.texi (-flimit-function-alignment): Document.
>> * emit-rtl.h (struct rtl_data): Add max_insn_address field.
>> * final.c (shorten_branches): Set it.
>> * varasm.c (assemble_start_function):
On 10/14/2016 12:28 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/12/2016 09:27 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Yes, something like "if max_skip >= func_size, temporarily lower
max_skip to func_size-1" (because otherwise we can create padding
bigger-or-equal to the entire function in size, which is stupid
- it's bet
On 10/14/2016 08:28 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/12/2016 09:27 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Yes, something like "if max_skip >= func_size, temporarily lower
max_skip to func_size-1" (because otherwise we can create padding
bigger-or-equal to the entire function in size, which is stupid
- it's bet
On 10/12/2016 09:27 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Yes, something like "if max_skip >= func_size, temporarily lower
max_skip to func_size-1" (because otherwise we can create padding
bigger-or-equal to the entire function in size, which is stupid
- it's better to just put the function in that space).
On 10/11/2016 10:14 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/11/2016 04:23 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
This is better than current behavior, but this is not what I want.
15-byte function does not need to be aligned to 16 bytes on a
machine with 128-byte L1I cachelines. It needs to be aligned to 128
bytes
On 10/11/2016 04:23 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
This is better than current behavior, but this is not what I want.
15-byte function does not need to be aligned to 16 bytes on a machine
with 128-byte L1I cachelines. It needs to be aligned to 128 bytes
if there are less than 15 bytes remaining; if
On 10/11/2016 04:11 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
Denys has submitted some patches to add more capabilities to the
-falign-* options, but these still have some issues, and the original
ideas seems to have been to allow for large alignments without
over-aligning small functions. The following patch i
