>I know that gcc has had problems with "regparm". However, I'm rather
>disgusted with some egcs people who say "we have problems and they will
>never get fixed". I don't personally believe in that kind of development
>behaviour, and if it's true it is really sad.
Agreed!
>I will continue to use "regparm" for the specific functions where I think
>there's a noticeable win (either in performance or simplicity - when
>mixing assembly and C the regparm calling convention can be much nicer to
>use). And I hope that not all egcs people consider it impossible to fix
For my experience it' s generally safe to use regparm when the function
with the regparm attribute is not recalled via a pointer to function (so
the asm generated can' t be something like "call %%eax").
Andrea[s] Arcangeli
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html