This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@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: Memory Allocation On Stack

From: Andrew Haley <aph-gcc at littlepinkcloud dot COM>
To: "Pankaj Kohli" <pankaj208 at gmail dot com>
Cc: tstdenis at ellipticsemi dot com, kanishk dot 85 at gmail dot com, gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 10:01:15 +0100
Subject: Re: Memory Allocation On Stack
References: <4ae360740707200111gc2af7e5pdf98871135f5fff5@mail.gmail.com> <18080.36491.87471.46391@zebedee.pink> <4ae360740707200409x1d076004mf3d4c104b9de4337@mail.gmail.com> <18080.39399.274735.59826@zebedee.pink> <4ae360740707211202y6d2e34acw21562f1fb04e96f6@mail.gmail.com>

Pankaj Kohli writes:
 > What about this one ? Three PUSHes + sub 0x10,%esp. That makes 28 bytes.
 > Stack is not aligned on 16-byte boundary in this case.

Rather than answer another question on this subject, I'm going to ask
you to think a little.

The problem we're trying to avoid is that a memory access that
straddles two cache lines can be very slow.  Have a look at your
sample code, and tell me whether you think it might be a problem in
this case.

Andrew.

References:
- Memory Allocation On Stack
  - From: Pankaj Kohli
- Re: Memory Allocation On Stack
  - From: Andrew Haley
- Re: Memory Allocation On Stack
  - From: Pankaj Kohli
- Re: Memory Allocation On Stack
  - From: Andrew Haley
- Re: Memory Allocation On Stack
  - From: Pankaj Kohli

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