llvm dev - Jul 2016 - grouping global variables by alignment: safe to do at LLVM level, or only at Clang level?

> On Jul 25, 2016, at 20:53, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> Isn’t something a linker could/should do?
We have a problem where some globals are lowered to an immediate address in the
DAG. It would be nice if we had some fixed order for the globals before then.
Right now the total allocated size at the end depends on the use order, block by
block, inverse within the block

-Matt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160726/32ca04ce/attachment.html>

On 07/26/2016 12:02 PM, Matt Arsenault wrote:
> We have a problem where some globals are lowered to an immediate address in
the DAG.
My apologies, but I don`t think I really understood that statement.  Could
anybody please
expand/explain?

Regards,

Abe

> On Jul 26, 2016, at 10:27, Abe Skolnik <a.skolnik at samsung.com>
wrote:
> 
> On 07/26/2016 12:02 PM, Matt Arsenault wrote:
> 
>> We have a problem where some globals are lowered to an immediate
address in the DAG.
> 
> My apologies, but I don`t think I really understood that statement.  Could
anybody please expand/explain?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Abe
The first allocated global has address 0. If a 16 byte object is allocated, the
next object’s address will be the constant 16

-Matt