From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7037 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2006 08:23:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 7005 invoked by uid 48); 23 Sep 2006 08:23:22 -0000 Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 08:23:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060923082322.7004.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/13685] Building simple test application with -march=pentium3 -Os gives SIGSEGV (unaligned sse instruction) In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "agner at agner dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-09/txt/msg02218.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #26 from agner at agner dot org 2006-09-23 08:23 ------- Thank you for fixing this, but you need to tell the world which solution you have chosen. Please see the discussion at the dublicate bug http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27537 for arguments for and against each possible solution. You need to specify whether the chosen solution is to enforce 16 byte stack alignment regardless of -Os option or the solution is to make no assumption about stack alignment when making XMM code. This is an ABI issue that has to be standardized and made public. The makers of the Intel compiler are waiting for a resolution to this issue so that they can make their compiler compatible with GCC. For the same reason, assembly programmers need to know whether stack alignment is required or not. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13685