Re: Why does gcc produce an unnecessary `nop' instruction?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



"PRC" <panruochen@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> >It's probably caused by requested alignment of the next function.
> >Note that nop is just the value 0.
> >
> >To see whether gcc is actually generating the nop, use the
> >--save-temps option when you compile, and look at the .s file.  If you
> >don't see the nop there, it's coming from something other than gcc.
> 
> I look at the `objdump'ed assembly file again and I find that all functions
> start at the address which is 8-byte aligned. 
> Is there a particular good reason for 8-byte alignment, even if the target ARCH
> is 32-bit rather than 64-bit and aligment is quite a little waste of storage and 
> runtime memory?

Assuming you haven't used the -falign-functions option, then they are
probably being aligned so that they start on cache line boundaries.  I
don't see any code in the ARC backend to do this, so I'm not sure
where it is coming from.

Ian

[Index of Archives]     [Linux C Programming]     [Linux Kernel]     [eCos]     [Fedora Development]     [Fedora Announce]     [Autoconf]     [The DWARVES Debugging Tools]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux GCC]

  Powered by Linux