From:	Ben Peddell <killer DOT lightspeed AT bigpond DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language:	en-us, en
MIME-Version:	1.0
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Bug 00314 -- div() still broken
References:	<3e9c6920$0$21928$afc38c87@> <fA9pa.20115$1s1 DOT 299825 AT newsfeeds DOT bigpond DOT com> <3EA5477F DOT 2020901 AT cyberoptics DOT com> <SzSpa.21592$1s1 DOT 332473 AT newsfeeds DOT bigpond DOT com> <3ea85d95$0$12489$4c41069e AT reader1 DOT ash DOT ops DOT us DOT uu DOT net>
Lines:	39
Message-ID:	<Ah9qa.22112$1s1.343387@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 Apr 2003 22:00:22 +1000
NNTP-Posting-Host:	144.139.176.186
X-Trace:	newsfeeds.bigpond.com 1051271392 144.139.176.186 (Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:49:52 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:49:52 EST
Organization:	Telstra BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.com)
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eric Rudd wrote:
> Ben Peddell wrote:
> 
>> Eric Rudd wrote:
>>
>>> I think I had some problem with -fomit-frame-pointer, but I'm still 
>>> investigating.
>>
>>
>> Things are being pushed wrong.
>> edi is supposed to hold the address of the div_t structure, yet is has 
>> 0x28 (40) in it. eax and ebx are supposed to have 40 in them, yet they 
>> have -3 in them.
>> div() wants the stack to look like:
>>     16(%ebp): divisor
>>     12(%ebp): numerator
>>      8(%ebp): &return
>> But it appears to look like:
>>     16(%ebp): something between -2 and +2
>>     12(%ebp): divisor
>>      8(%ebp): numerator
>>
>> There in lies the problem.
> 
> 
> This confirms my suspicion that there is a problem with 
> -fomit-frame-pointer.  I thought that routines in libc.a could be called 
> from a program compiled either with or without -fomit-frame-pointer, but 
> I found that I could call the existing div.o in libc.a only if I didn't 
> use -fomit-frame-pointer.  Hmm...
> 
> -Eric Rudd
> rudd AT cyberoptics DOT com
> 

Obviously, some sort of optimization puts the div_t structure in 
%edx:%eax instead of 16(%ebp). It would be a good optimization if it 
didn't break the libraries.

- Raw text -