On 06/26/2017 07:44 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
-/* The layout here is designed to avoid crossing of a 32-bit boundary.
- If we do so, gcc adds padding, expanding the size to 12. */
+/* The layout here is designed to avoid crossing of a 32-bit
boundary. */
This isn't correct now? Do we mean we n
Richard Henderson writes:
> Rather than have a separate buffer of 10*max_ops entries,
> give each opcode 10 entries. The result is actually a bit
> smaller and should have slightly more cache locality.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson
> ---
The changes look fine, some questions bellow:
