https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77308
--- Comment #52 from Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de> --- (In reply to wilco from comment #51) > > Indeed, that's the reason behind the existing check. However it disables all > profitable bswap cases while still generating unaligned accesses if no bswap > is needed. So I am looking for a callback that gives the correct answer. It > would need to check -mno-unaligned-access and the target capabilities (eg. > if unaligned accesses are supported in hardware but really expensive we want > to avoid them). Yes. I think ARM is becoming a non-strict-alignment platform. While x86_64 is moving in the opposite direction. Would it be possible to handle the STRICT_ALIGNMENT switchable like int the rs6000, in that case you have also more flexibility in the handling of SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS macro ?
