http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49169
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-07 07:32:37 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > Btw, we finally should introduce a target hook for this I think. Thanks for the patch in comment #2. How strongly do you feel about the hook though? In PR35705, it sounded like a lot of targets actually need an opt-out for functions, either because of ISA encoding (ARM, MIPS, SH) or because of function descriptors (IA-64, PA, PPC). I notice that ARM and mcore also have optimisation-dependent FUNCTION_BOUNDARYs. Arguably (very arguably) that's a bug, and they should be using align_functions instead. But if we make a deliberate decision to honour DECL_ALIGN on functions, then FUNCTION_BOUNDARY really will be an ABI property. I'm just worried that the combination of that and the need to identify exactly which targets should define the hook might be more hassle than the optimisation is worth. You said in that bug that masking function addresses isn't likely to be a common operation, and TBH, I still agree. Richard