Support unaligned load/store on more ARM targets

[Renato Golin]

On 15 May 2013 16:50, JF Bastien <jfb at google.com> wrote:

> I assume that what you're suggesting is a switch that allows unaligned
> accesses regardless of target?
>

Both ways, really. Not that it would make much sense to the average user,
but it would be a useful tool to investigate alignment codegen issues.
"strict-align" and "no-strict-align" seem natural, with defaults
"no-strict" only on v6-darwin and v7-all.


It would really only make sense to use it on non-Darwin v6, and I guess the
> option description could say this. How should I name it? GCC has
> -mstrict-align and -mno-strict-align, and LLVM currently has
> -arm-strict-align. I could call it -arm-no-strict-align but that's a
> mouthful. Maybe -arm-allow-unaligned?
>

Why do we have the "arm" in the name? Can we not just call it like GCC? I'm
not very found of calling two opposite flags completely different names...
Between "arm-allow-unaligned" and "arm-no-strict-align", I prefer the
latter. ;)

cheers,
--renato
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20130515/1ddb4e32/attachment.html>