http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377

--- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 
2011-04-07 10:24:45 UTC ---
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011, irar at il dot ibm.com wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
> 
> --- Comment #19 from Ira Rosen <irar at il dot ibm.com> 2011-04-07 09:55:44 
> UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #18)
> > I think rather tree-vect-data-refs.c:vector_alignment_reachable_p should
> > be adjusted.  These "packed" checks in the target hooks don't make any
> > sense to me either.  
> 
> Yes, I think this can be moved to vector_alignment_reachable_p.
> 
> > In fact, I fail to see the point of a target hook
> > completely (if it isn't maybe just for cost issues).
> 
> There are some target specific checks in rs6000.c and arm.c.

I saw them, but I can't see what the difference is between
"aligned" and "aligned" ;)  Either the targets have aligned loads
or they don't.  We can target independently check whether we
can for example reach 16-byte alignment - in which cases is it then
we can't "reach" that alignment anyway due to target issues?

Reply via email to