Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2001/10/22/23:12:15

Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <038601c15b70$f5ce0930$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <02a201c15b5b$7910a4d0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20011022204740 DOT B18754 AT redhat DOT com> <20011023005236 DOT 7136 DOT qmail AT lizard DOT curl DOT com> <20011022205828 DOT C18754 AT redhat DOT com> <02ea01c15b5f$7e673bc0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20011022212759 DOT A19493 AT redhat DOT com> <032701c15b64$ea5523b0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20011022215102 DOT A20341 AT redhat DOT com> <033101c15b66$24fc2260$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <033701c15b68$f3684d70$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20011022222324 DOT B20427 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: 1.3.4 status?
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:15:25 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Oct 2001 03:20:06.0803 (UTC) FILETIME=[9D16BE30:01C15B71]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: 1.3.4 status?

> It is possible that a function would call __chkstk when it needed to
> allocate space beyond a certain limit.  Not every function begins with
> call to __chkstk/alloca, though.

objdump shows a large number of calls to __chkstk - particularly in
functions using inline variables that are large. My 2c is that somewhere
in gcc there is a heuristic that says "over size x variables get
alloca'd". Now, AFAIK for i386 - win32 that doesn't make much sense -
with the exception of variables nested deep into a if/case statement
which are large && only one path is ever traversed per function call. In
that scenario it will save stack space. It'd be neat to test with it
turned off though. I wonder if there is a gcc option to do that?


- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019