On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Bruce Evans wrote: > > > I haven't done anything to clean up the patch. I hope the problem > > > will go away in future versions of gcc (align the stack at runtime in > > > the few routines that actually need it). > > > > Well, if Linux aligns the initial stack, the chance that gcc will have > > auto-alignment added sounds to be about zero. You might as well go ahead > > with your patch when you get a chance. > > There is a nonzero probability that the pessimization of aligning in almost > every routine will be fixed someday. Actually, the pessimization is worse > -- the alignment is done before every call. Even so, I'd wager that you can align the initial stack a few months ahead of when gcc's alignment is improved. > foo: > pushl %ebp > movl %esp,%ebp > subl $8,%esp # <- extra instruction for alignment (for foo) > addl $-12,%esp # <- extra instruction for alignment (for f1) What disgusting code. I find it amazing that they didn't even stick in some peephole optimizer to at least limit it to one operation. > My patch is not suitable for committing verbatim. It has 2 or 3 XXX's. > > Bruce True, but I'm sure you're capable of fixing it up if you so desire. :) Mike "Silby" Silbersack To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
