In article <20180709145848.ga21...@panix.com>, Thor Lancelot Simon <t...@panix.com> wrote: >On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 12:24:15PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >> >> The C11 standard could indeed use consistent wording. In one place >> "correctly aligned" in other alignment "restrictions" and >> "requirements". None of these terms is marked as a keyword or term and I >> read them in the context of the document as the same phenomenon (I >> haven't found a different interpretation of this in the wild). > >Right, but, architecturally, x86 doesn't have these "restrictions" or >"requirements". Not for correctness, not with the overwhelming majority >of integer instructions. Only (sometimes) for performance.
Unless you change one bit in the PSL and then the above is wrong: #define PSL_AC 0x00040000 /* alignment check flag */ christos