This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: Further observations regarding alloca on i586-pc-linux-gnu

To: Joerg Pommnitz <pommnitz at darmstadt dot gmd dot de>, Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
Subject: Re: Further observations regarding alloca on i586-pc-linux-gnu
From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 14:08:21 -0700
Cc: Carlo Wood <carlo at runaway dot xs4all dot nl>, egcs-bugs at cygnus dot com, "egcs at cygnus dot com" <egcs at cygnus dot com>
References: <oryasifca8.fsf@iguacu.dcc.unicamp.br> <199808221724.TAA14230@jolan.ppro> <19980823043600.A4080@dot.cygnus.com> <35E188FE.BE0D57FA@darmstadt.gmd.de>
Reply-To: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>

On Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 05:38:38PM +0200, Joerg Pommnitz wrote:
> I really think the test is valid. There are no documented constraints
> on the usage of alloca. An option "-fno-inline-alloca" and the generic
> alloca emulation included in glibc would provide a useable work around.

As discussed elsewhere on this thread, no it wouldn't.  You'll
get _exactly_ the same results from the alloca in glibc.

With the malloc-based c alloca in gcc, it would work, but that
is rather different.

r~

References:
- Re: Further observations regarding alloca on i586-pc-linux-gnu
  - From: Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Further observations regarding alloca on i586-pc-linux-gnu
  - From: Carlo Wood
- Re: Further observations regarding alloca on i586-pc-linux-gnu
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Further observations regarding alloca on i586-pc-linux-gnu
  - From: Joerg Pommnitz

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