Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 13:24:33 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Fixed stack size?
In-Reply-To: <7neier$1mh$6@news.luth.se>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990725131953.6438B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On 25 Jul 1999, Martin Str|mberg wrote:

> Ah... But why isn't it placed as high as possible so it can grow down
> (as it usually does in Un*x)?

That was tried in v1.x, and the result was that -fomit-frame-pointer 
pointer was broken.  The problem is that a special expand-down stack 
segment ties up the BP register, and you cannot use it as a GP register 
anymore.

If you are willing to have the stack be part of the same segment as .data,
.bss and the heap, then you cannot place it ``as high as possible'', 
since that would mean your initial address space will be too large (it 
has to map in the high addresses), and you lose some of the memory 
protection.