On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Jul 9, 2014, at 11:29 AM, Eric Christopher <echri...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> - The change only affects rare cases: passing a struct by value that is >>>> * not a float/vector special case, and >>>> * has a size of 1, 2, 4, 8, or 16 bytes, and >>>> * has an alignment requirement of 16 bytes or more > >>> I copied the Darwin maintainers and active testers so that they are >>> explicitly aware of the ABI issue. They can decide if they want to fix >>> the ABI alignment issue on Darwin. > >> Thanks David, In general I'd personally prefer to fix the ABI issues, >> but PPC darwin is beyond EoL by the original company and I don't have >> any hardware for it myself - in which case I'll leave it up to our >> more active testers or someone with hardware. (Mike? Have old ppc >> hardware sitting around?) > > Well, I think from a safety perspective I think it is ok, as the system > header files and most libraries I would expect not to align to 16 bytes or > more. The problem with this line of thinking, it only takes 1 structure, in > one place that is used often (stat, X11) to completely kill things. Normally > I would do a world build with the change in it, and a fink build with it in > it, and if no changes occur, the change is reasonably safe. I don’t have the > machines/system to do either unfortunately. I had been testing ppc with > emulation, so I can’t do much of that anymore either. > > So, I think I will punt to the users that still have G5 darwin, they know who > they are… I’d say, lets leave it as is, and if they think it is a good idea > as well (that would make it 3 of 3) and can do a test suite run at least with > the change, then I’d approve it.
Completely agreed. -eric
