From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Oct  8 03:24:26 2003
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D4A4816A4B3; Wed,  8 Oct 2003 03:24:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9098443F3F; Wed,  8 Oct 2003 03:24:24 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from gamplex.bde.org (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3p2/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00332;
	Wed, 8 Oct 2003 20:24:21 +1000
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 20:23:00 +1000 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@gamplex.bde.org
To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <200310080737.h987bBYS028838@repoman.freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20031008201225.U4605@gamplex.bde.org>
References: <200310080737.h987bBYS028838@repoman.freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org
cc: src-committers@freebsd.org
cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/savecore savecore.c
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 10:24:27 -0000

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:

> marcel      2003/10/08 00:37:11 PDT
>
>   FreeBSD src repository
>
>   Modified files:
>     sbin/savecore        savecore.c
>   Log:
>   Revision 1.61 changed the allocation of buffer 'buf' in DoFile() from
>   the stack to the heap to work around a problem on ia64. Now, roughly
>   16 months and two compiler updates later, it isn't an issue anymore
>   in the sense that putting a 1M buffer on the stack just works and we
>   don't actually need to work around anything anymore.
>   However, since there's no advantage or need to put the buffer on the
>   stack (again), this change merely removes the XXX comment describing
>   that there's an explicit reason for the heap allocation. Hence, this
>   change is a functional no-op.
>
>   PR: ia64/38677

There is a negative advantage to putting the buffer on the stack.  It asks
for a misaligned buffer.

Bruce