From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id D28E83861028; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 13:21:01 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D28E83861028 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1596633661; bh=Td3RBo8pKsgk+auDcq6mJoJA2AZCztTgn0yz+woB0AE=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=bE8YpgncpfQ+Rsb1WvYlgWUnSvG+yEkZ0MqyV9XnviTTCeQCxWA/aoAwOueIfo9ii RKrZnqfJBPX/UzLj+TP3zJr7D6o99lRvPIwps9NI3bHcwcQOsq/qJXCLVSHYfo+vzB iLRvCM4tpD0O9nyiYgJkwoGs7CM+SyaisvLeAtds= From: "zhongyunde at huawei dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/96427] Missing align attribute for anchor section from local variables Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 13:21:01 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: zhongyunde at huawei dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 13:21:01 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96427 vfdff changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zhongyunde at huawei dot c= om --- Comment #4 from vfdff --- I test your case base on x86-64 gcc 10.1 with -O2 -S -mavx512f, the .rodata aligned to 64 bytes, and it aligned to 32 bytes on x86-64 gcc 9.3 with -O2 = -S -mavx512f, i.e. it have different behaviour base on different gcc version. so it is a undefined behaviour ?=