Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:42:20 +0000 From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RE: __asm help.. Message-ID: <20001212014220.E76746@hand.dotat.at> In-Reply-To: <200012082129.eB8LTMM22955@earth.backplane.com> References: <XFMail.001208104618.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <200012082129.eB8LTMM22955@earth.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> wrote: >:As long as gcc uses %ebp to address local variables and functoin parameters >:rather than %esp you should be fine. %esp will be preserved, but if %esp is >:for some odd reason used to address a variable during the C code, you are hosed. > > I strongly recommend against making assumptions about GCC's use of %ebp vs > %esp... not if you want the __asm code to survive the GCC optimizer! But if gcc breaks that assumption, that implies it would break alloca(), and presumably they wouldn't do that. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch fanf@covalent.net dot@dotat.at "Dead! And yet there he stands!" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001212014220.E76746>