Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 07:45:26 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/release/scripts doFS.sh Message-ID: <20010319074526.A26375@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20010309043513.A28523@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@FreeBSD.ORG on Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 04:35:13AM -0800 References: <200103090103.f2913GQ88940@freefall.freebsd.org> <200103090406.f2946Bs04692@billy-club.village.org> <20010309043513.A28523@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Moved from cvs-all to -alpha] On 2001-Mar-09 04:35:13 -0800, David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote: >On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 09:06:11PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: >> Needless to say, this means that we are right on the hairy edge of >> overflowing for the alpha install disk. > >We've been on the hairy edge with every 4.x release, and commit to the >-current kernel. :-( gcc generates a fair amount of code padding to meet alignment recommendations. On the i386, this can be disabled with the -malign-... options. Would it be worthwhile adding similar options to the Alpha to get rid of the ".align 16" statements bloating the install code? Based on a quick study of the code, it should be fairly easy to add a new "-mno-code-align" option and re-write the LOOP_ALIGN and LABEL_ALIGN_AFTER_BARRIER macros. I'll provide patches if this approach seems useful. (Actually implementing all the i386 alignment choices is probably overkill). Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010319074526.A26375>