diff options
| author | Duncan Sands <baldrick@free.fr> | 2011-11-29 18:26:38 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Duncan Sands <baldrick@free.fr> | 2011-11-29 18:26:38 +0000 |
| commit | ca6f8ddbf8aa25af7bac1f2d55d6136e72ad132c (patch) | |
| tree | 6501912377a2abb9a8f0a01d7ec4014c6a2db361 /clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInstance.cpp | |
| parent | 85b4a37d59b9f165ea6460d4b43a8e9ad139b076 (diff) | |
| download | bcm5719-llvm-ca6f8ddbf8aa25af7bac1f2d55d6136e72ad132c.tar.gz bcm5719-llvm-ca6f8ddbf8aa25af7bac1f2d55d6136e72ad132c.zip | |
Fix a theoretical problem (not seen in the wild): if different instances of a
weak variable are compiled by different compilers, such as GCC and LLVM, while
LLVM may increase the alignment to the preferred alignment there is no reason to
think that GCC will use anything more than the ABI alignment. Since it is the
GCC version that might end up in the final program (as the linkage is weak), it
is wrong to increase the alignment of loads from the global up to the preferred
alignment as the alignment might only be the ABI alignment.
Increasing alignment up to the ABI alignment might be OK, but I'm not totally
convinced that it is. It seems better to just leave the alignment of weak
globals alone.
llvm-svn: 145413
Diffstat (limited to 'clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInstance.cpp')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions
