Jakub Jelinek wrote:
If we use MIN (tree_low_cst (TYPE_SIZE (type), 0), BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT)
here, I'm afraid that would be much bigger ABI incompatibility.
Currently, say
typedef char __attribute__((vector_size (64))) v64qi;
is 64 bytes aligned on most arches, even when BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT is much
smaller.
GCC 4.0.x on s390{,x} aligned vector_size 1/2/4/8/64/128/... types
to their size, just vector_size 16 and 32 has been 8 bytes aligned
(BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT).
That sounds very strange. Is there a rationale for that, or is this a
SNAFU?
Not capping to BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT might have issues with some object formats
though, if they don't support ridiculously big aligments.
We have MAX_OFILE_ALIGNMENT for that.
