From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Mon Feb 11 20:44:39 2008 X-ME-UUID: 20080211174912717.AF2BF1C00399@mwinf2002.orange.fr Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:49:11 +0100 From: Patrice Mandin To: mint@fishpool.com Subject: Re: [MiNT] Alignment 2 Message-Id: <20080211184911.1c5c6a31.mandin.patrice@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <47ADE1A7.7040503@freesbee.fr> References: <4798E197.6050500@freesbee.fr> <479E54DF.5050804@freesbee.fr> <47A8BBC4.4000405@freesbee.fr> <20080206211406.07e12a37.mandin.patrice@wanadoo.fr> <47ADE1A7.7040503@freesbee.fr> Organization: Chez moi X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: mandin.patrice@wanadoo.fr Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail.sparemint.org id m1C1icZt023588 Le Sat, 09 Feb 2008 18:23:51 +0100 Vincent Rivière a écrit: > Patrice Mandin wrote: > >> So we should have 2 configurations for our development tools for > >> optimal size and performance : > >> "Optimized for ST": -m68000, no FPU, alignment on 2 > >> "Optimized for Falcon": -m68020-60, with FPU, alignment on 4 > >> > >> That would be good. > > > > Not so sure, what would happen if you mix 68000 program with 68020 > > compiled libs ? Or more frequently, compiling a program for 020+ and > > linking against 68000 libraries (because 020+ libraries don't exist) > > ? > > Well, it will produce an invalid executable, or course ! > It is currently the same problem with -mshort > > The problem is about the multilib model in GCC. > The different multilib versions of a library have more or less the > same contents, but are binary incompatible. It should be possible to > forbid linking of different versions, but it is not the case right > now. Then I think it would be wise to keep alignment to 2 then, to retain compatibility between libs. It's already a huge task to port recent binutils and gcc, you don't need to add more difficulty, and it will be harder to check what would be the cause of a problem if something breaks. You can always set alignment to 4 in a later release/patch, when all is tested and working. -- Patrice Mandin WWW: http://pmandin.atari.org/ Programmeur Linux, Atari Spécialité: Développement, jeux