X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:22:02 -0600 From: Brian Ford Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: 16 byte pthread stack alignments In-Reply-To: <20111221154104.GB11841@calimero.vinschen.de> Message-ID: References: <20111221094211.GH23547@calimero.vinschen.de> <4EF1F937.9040107@gmail.com> <20111221154104.GB11841@calimero.vinschen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com On Wed, 21 Dec 2011, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Dec 21 15:20, Dave Korn wrote: > > GCC assumes that the stack starts off 16-aligned when the OS hands over to > > the exe's entrypoint, and then makes sure it stays that way by always rounding > > stack frame sizes up to the nearest multiple of 16. Or at any rate that's how > > it's supposed to work. > > Ok. Does that mean my patch from > http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2011-12/msg00435.html should be the right > thing to do for pthreads? I guess I will have to do the same in > _dll_crt0 then... Probably. I'm trying to test now, but I haven't built cygwin in years now so I'm still working to get things set up. I've also lost track of Cygwin internals. Does it make sense to you that those two patches from 2004 would no longer be effective? -- Brian Ford Staff Realtime Software Engineer VITAL - Visual Simulation Systems FlightSafety International the best safety device in any aircraft is a well-trained crew... -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple