[Peter Anvin]
> At the time the original x86 ABI was created, a lot of C code was
> still K&R, and thus prototypes didn't exist...
True enough. That does explain a lot. But what about the Alpha? From
reading gcc source awhile back I seem to remember that most if not all
parameters are passed in registers. How does *that* work with varargs
and no prototypes? Or does it?
> I don't think we want to introduce a new ABI in user space at this
> time. If we ever have to major-rev the ABI (libc.so.7), then we
> should consider this.
Ah, but kernel-side? My point was that if gcc (and binutils) is
flexible enough to let you pick an ABI at runtime, perhaps a RISCoid
ABI for x86 could coexist with the SysV one, to be used initially for
self-contained code like the kernel. (And later, a possible transition
in userspace.)
Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 15 2000 - 21:00:21 EST