>>
>> #if !_STRING_ARCH_unaligned
>> /* To check alignment gcc has an appropriate operator. Other
>> compilers don't. */
>> # if __GNUC__ >= 2
>> # define UNALIGNED_P(p) (((md5_uintptr) p) % __alignof__ (md5_uint32)
>> != 0)
>> # else
>> # define UNALIGNED_P(p) (((md5_uintptr) p) % sizeof (md5_uint32) !=
>> 0)
>> # endif
>> len --;
>
>
> Where did this ' len --;' come from, it is not in my code. Maybe that
> is where you are getting unaligned.
Sorry, it is an error from me when I copied, as I could not debug the
macro, I added a line a len ++ in the conditionnal preprocessor branch
to see what was defined, and then a len -- to get normal size back, I
forgot to clean the len --. That does not change the problem.
>
>
>> if (UNALIGNED_P (buffer))
>> while (len > 64)
>> {
>> memcpy (ctx->buffer, buffer, 64);
>> md5_process_block (ctx->buffer, 64, ctx);
>> buffer = (const char *) buffer + 64;
>> len -= 64;
>> }
>> else
>> #endif
>> md5_process_block (buffer, len & ~63, ctx);
>> buffer = (const void *) ((const char *) buffer + (len & ~63));
>> len &= 63;
>> }
>> I was able to fully compile GCC MELT branch by only adding a pair of
>> braces as you can see on the given diff file. I guess this is a bug in
>> libiberty (even if I can't understand why my pointer is not aligned).
>
> It certainly seems to me that those last three lines should be in a
> single block so they are all controlled by the else clause. Though I
> also wonder if anyone ever defines _STRING_ARCH_unaligned. It doesn't
> happen anywhere in configure so I guess the only way it would get
> defined is by a user via CFLAGS. I wonder if this #if is even needed,
> then we could make the code cleaner by not having an partially ifdef'ed
> if/else statement.
Thanks, I will propose a patch on gcc-patches.
Pierre Vittet
>
> Steve Ellcey
> sje@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
