Re: svn commit: r206424 - head/usr.bin/xlint/lint1

2010-04-11 Thread Bruce Evans
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010, Roman Divacky wrote: On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 07:16:12PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: However2, the system ALIGN() on amd64 doesn't know the correct alignment either (both essentially had 64 bits hard-coded). Now xlint uses a different hard-coded alignment (128 bits).

Re: svn commit: r206424 - head/usr.bin/xlint/lint1

2010-04-11 Thread Roman Divacky
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 07:16:12PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, Roman Divacky wrote: > > >Log: > > Rename the ALIGN macro to LINT_ALIGN so it does not clash with > > machine/param.h > > > > Bump the alignment to 16bytes because lint1 memory allocator is used for > > objects tha

Re: svn commit: r206424 - head/usr.bin/xlint/lint1

2010-04-11 Thread Bruce Evans
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, Roman Divacky wrote: Log: Rename the ALIGN macro to LINT_ALIGN so it does not clash with machine/param.h Bump the alignment to 16bytes because lint1 memory allocator is used for objects that require 16bytes alignment on amd64 (ie. val_t). This makes lint1 work when compi