From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 987 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2013 23:38:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libffi-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libffi-discuss-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 959 invoked by uid 89); 16 Sep 2013 23:38:57 -0000 Received: from mail-pd0-f173.google.com (HELO mail-pd0-f173.google.com) (209.85.192.173) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 23:38:57 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pd0-f173.google.com Received: by mail-pd0-f173.google.com with SMTP id p10so4757300pdj.18 for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:38:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.66.226.46 with SMTP id rp14mr5535370pac.133.1379374734971; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:38:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bubble.grove.modra.org ([101.166.26.37]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f2sm33814494pbg.44.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:38:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 18D2BEA007A; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:08:49 +0930 (CST) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 23:38:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: Andrew Haley Cc: Bill Schmidt , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, libffi-discuss@sourceware.org, dje@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH, PowerPC] Fix PR57949 (ABI alignment issue) Message-ID: <20130916233848.GA28086@bubble.grove.modra.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Haley , Bill Schmidt , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, libffi-discuss@sourceware.org, dje@gcc.gnu.org References: <1376494321.17852.17.camel@oc8801110288.ibm.com> <20130911113845.GF2643@bubble.grove.modra.org> <1378904143.3730.46.camel@gnopaine> <20130912021149.GG2643@bubble.grove.modra.org> <52317C41.8070303@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52317C41.8070303@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2013/txt/msg00164.txt.bz2 On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 09:33:05AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 09/12/2013 03:11 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > > We have precedent for compiling libffi based on gcc preprocessor > > defines, eg. __NO_FPRS__, so here's a way of making upstream libffi > > compatible with the various versions of gcc out there. I've taken the > > condition under which we align aggregates from > > rs6000_function_arg_boundary, and defined a macro with a value of the > > maximum alignment. > > I would have thought that a runtime or configure-time test in libffi > would be better. I don't see how a runtime check can be done, and a configure test just adds another layer of indirection. How is testing a cpp macro at configure time better than testing the same at compile time? -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM