[Bug target/111555] [AArch64] __ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED should be undefined with -mstrict-align
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111555 Fangrui Song changed: What|Removed |Added CC||i at maskray dot me --- Comment #5 from Fangrui Song --- It seems that newer ports prefer -mstrict-align/-mno-strict-align to -mno-unaligned-access/-munaligned-access. Clang handling these options as aliases is unfortunate. I'll fix this issue in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85350 (hopefully milestone: 19.1.0)
[Bug target/111555] [AArch64] __ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED should be undefined with -mstrict-align
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111555 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > (In reply to YunQiang Su from comment #2) > > For AArch64, clang supports `-mno-unaligned-access`, while gcc doesn't, > > should we add it as an alias of -mstrict-align? > > -mno-unaligned-access is the arm option here rather than the aarch64 option > :). > I suspect clang folks decided to have the same option for both targets. I > don't think we should support -mno-unaligned-access for aarch64 GCC. See PR 99890 where -mstrict-align was rejected for arm.
[Bug target/111555] [AArch64] __ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED should be undefined with -mstrict-align
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111555 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to YunQiang Su from comment #2) > For AArch64, clang supports `-mno-unaligned-access`, while gcc doesn't, > should we add it as an alias of -mstrict-align? -mno-unaligned-access is the arm option here rather than the aarch64 option :). I suspect clang folks decided to have the same option for both targets. I don't think we should support -mno-unaligned-access for aarch64 GCC.
[Bug target/111555] [AArch64] __ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED should be undefined with -mstrict-align
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111555 YunQiang Su changed: What|Removed |Added CC||syq at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from YunQiang Su --- `-mno-unaligned-access` is also supported by MIPSr6. I guess we should add a more generic macro for this case? Is __UNALIGN_ACCESS_DISABLED__ OK? For AArch64, clang supports `-mno-unaligned-access`, while gcc doesn't, should we add it as an alias of -mstrict-align?
[Bug target/111555] [AArch64] __ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED should be undefined with -mstrict-align
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111555 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-09-23 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Confirmed. Though the ACLE spec (https://developer.arm.com/documentation/ihi0053/d/?lang=en) is not clear here as this part was written as part of aarch32/thumb2 part rather than referencing aarch64 ...
