Re: Question on BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT in GCC on NetBSD/m68k
On Fri, 13 Jun 2025, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-06-12 at 18:19 +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Jun 2025, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 20:16 -0700, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Fixing pthreads would probably go a long way. That's where we lost
> > > > about half of our performance.
> > >
> > > This may be accurate, but I'm again not sure how this is related to
> > > the discussion we're having.
> > >
> >
> > It's related because such changes could impact all of the C libraries
> > and compiler toolchains that you wish to port. So it's an example of a
> > burden created by package archive growth.
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2025/06/msg00048.html
>
> m68k with 4 bytes alignment works fine on NetBSD.
>
Please read the messages you reply to. The topic was a regression.
> > It's also related because such an enhancement may involve an ABI break.
> > That's why I mentioned threading a week ago.
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2025/06/msg00018.html
>
> Which I don't care about because the current ABI is broken.
>
You should care! If you are going to get a new ABI, either you are going
to do that work yourself or you'll have to collaborate with others who
want certain characteristics from a new ABI.
And here again, it appears that you never read the message you're replying
to. (And here I am, making the spam problem worse by replying to it...)
Reply to: