[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5369B32E.9060108@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 06:14:38 +0200
From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add definition of max_align_t to stddef.h
On 07/05/14 05:13, Rich Felker wrote:
> If we want to achieve an alignment of 8, the above definition is
> wrong; it will no longer have alignment 8 once the bug is fixed.
> However I'm not convinced it's the right thing to do. Defining it as 8
> is tightening malloc's contract to always return 8-byte-aligned memory
> (note that it presently returns at least 16-byte alignment anyway, but
> this is an implementation detail that's not meant to be observable,
> not part of the interface contract).
The current natural alignment shouldn't be 32 for AVX and 16 for SSE ?
Not sure how wasteful would be but it would be surely a boon for the
applications I'm mostly involved.
lu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
