Re: Sibcall arguments passed on the stack

[Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>]

On Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 04:10  PM, John David Anglin wrote:

> > rth suggested here
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-09/msg00828.html
> > that the stack slots ought to be in CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
> > My patch, which started that thread, will not fix 12372, so rth
> > is probably right, as usual.
>
> Yes, that appears to be the best fix.  What had bothered me about it
> was there appears to have been a concious decision not to add stack
> slots to the CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.

That disturbs me too; the documentation is quite clear that this is 
intentional.
That's why I didn't pursue it further (well, that and a mistaken belief 
that my patch
fixed the entire problem...)