This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: i386 stack missalignment on main
- To: law at redhat dot com
- Subject: Re: i386 stack missalignment on main
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 00:29:25 -0700
- Cc: Joern Rennecke <amylaar at redhat dot com>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, aj at suse dot de, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <200107310221.f6V2LsR08857@phal.cambridge.redhat.com> <14207.996560828@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 12:27:08AM -0600, law@redhat.com wrote:
> > But on pretty much any modern processor, the argument pointer is only
> > a figment of the compilers imagination. It has to be eliminated.
>
> Err, no. There are some with argument pointers which are actively used.
> PA64 is a good example.
No, Joern has made a decent generalization -- *most* targets must
eliminate the argument pointer. That is to say, practically all
of them. PA64 is an exception, true.
As for "good" or "bad", well... I guess it's interesting in some
ways -- it's probably the only C ABI that could directly support
call-with-continuation. Though that does strike me as an odd thing
to want to do with a C ABI.
r~