This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [windows][rft] regparm vs stack probe fix

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Danny Smith <dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:13:10 -0700
Subject: Re: [windows][rft] regparm vs stack probe fix
References: <20031020070041.GD3658@redhat.com> <001101c396eb$6d88f900$5f6d65da@DANNY> <20031020132705.GC17120@redhat.com>

On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 09:27:05AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Richard, do you see any problem with using ebx for argument passing and just
> bypassing this problem entirely?

ebx is call saved.


r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [windows][rft] regparm vs stack probe fix
  - From: Christopher Faylor

References:
- [windows][rft] regparm vs stack probe fix
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: [windows][rft] regparm vs stack probe fix
  - From: Danny Smith
- Re: [windows][rft] regparm vs stack probe fix
  - From: Christopher Faylor

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]