From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-199981-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 8820 invoked by alias); 21 Aug 2019 17:35:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8627 invoked by uid 89); 21 Aug 2019 17:35:04 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=amonakovisprasru, amonakov@ispras.ru, H*i:sk:DC06E8B, H*f:sk:DC06E8B
X-HELO: mail-wr1-f49.google.com
Received: from mail-wr1-f49.google.com (HELO mail-wr1-f49.google.com) (209.85.221.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 17:35:03 +0000
Received: by mail-wr1-f49.google.com with SMTP id j16so2820462wrr.8        for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:35:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=gmail.com; s=20161025;        h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to         :cc:content-transfer-encoding;        bh=cw0kDsNdG/wln5Dx7u51WIZyijksZ7b6wNhxVRyCOlc=;        b=XjhHxsWqQF88b3ML3VOgFJ6lsBsRk9hu7kiwSslgoLa/2174bC5lZs7Lf+CPZxpGn5         NZaJLrC1SAly4BRCRObhxjKQJug5sO6Lc8mFT3Qb11RVxNnOVX1jn45Er7LsOOGZlW20         OgOr6FdabyqzESpZO1VdLyB5lFbhgEGOolOortvR0mXyEGaGqSYFNH6yUIMOEgUU3MK7         xA4YKmqhBk5BNO94yYTl9l2ju4BxDlfcRl8UfDAfKKXrQZS4xriLv3hiIqB6Lwk9E3Uy         5sK8lK9veF/HKNQVmSAE/vEhk0q+tdQietUFqXCIlXvHZ5MLTk90HLLeP66ZJxlcbXMB         /Cmg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <trinity-81dd3866-fe32-4da3-9727-47945a6dc667-1566218760407@3c-app-1and1-bs05> <1E465204-0887-49CB-8472-196EDE7AAE81@comcast.net> <055f71a6-7b20-eb80-6f0a-d7572c34fa47@arm.com> <alpine.LNX.2.20.13.1908191706100.32047@monopod.intra.ispras.ru> <trinity-02ba671e-c260-4ad9-a277-b1169d3026c8-1566279973304@3c-app-1and1-bs05> <alpine.LNX.2.20.13.1908211714420.32047@monopod.intra.ispras.ru> <0A5DAB14-F153-486B-BA04-6AD500C85E71@comcast.net> <alpine.LNX.2.20.13.1908211748560.32047@monopod.intra.ispras.ru> <DC06E8B3-EA12-47B2-B653-39241A123868@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <DC06E8B3-EA12-47B2-B653-39241A123868@comcast.net>
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 17:35:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAH6eHdQWiSujtQx=rPQoJ5ZL7FxK9DY4wFrEqBtkJ5yBC11ydg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: asking for __attribute__((aligned()) clarification
To: Paul Koning <paulkoning@comcast.net>
Cc: Alexander Monakov <amonakov@ispras.ru>, "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2019-08/txt/msg00175.txt.bz2

On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 at 17:50, Paul Koning <paulkoning@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 21, 2019, at 10:57 AM, Alexander Monakov <amonakov@ispras.ru> wr=
ote:
> >
> > On Wed, 21 Aug 2019, Paul Koning wrote:
> >
> >> I agree, but if the new approach generates a warning for code that was=
 written
> >> to the old rules, that would be unfortunate.
> >
> > FWIW I don't know which GCC versions accepted 'packed' on a scalar type.
>
> That wasn't what I meant; I was talking about the packed and aligned attr=
ibutes on struct members.  I thought you were saying that ((packed,aligned(=
2))) is now a warning.  That doesn't appear to be the case, though; it's ac=
cepted without complaint as it always was.

Right, nobody's suggesting that should be a warning. The warning is
for trying to pack a scalar variable, which is (and always was)
meaningless.