Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 12:28:57 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> Cc: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>, Michal Mertl <mime@traveller.cz>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, greg@bogslab.ucdavis.edu Subject: Re: stack alignment issues Message-ID: <200202052028.g15KSvj29739@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20020205134035.M1617-100000@patrocles.silby.com> <20020206071049.S502-100000@gamplex.bde.org> <20020205121923.O59017@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:> >
:> > What disgusting code. I find it amazing that they didn't even stick in
:> > some peephole optimizer to at least limit it to one operation.
:>
:> It's clearly the result of work in progress :-).
:
:I see really cruddy stuff like this every time i do a gcc -S, don't
:they watch for and try to fix this sort of thing?
:
:--
:-Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org]
I've been forced to add -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 to critical code
in certain projects to get rid of the crap GCC adds to the assembly.
I don't mind if GCC aligns the stack for routines that actually need
it, but what it does now - assume that the stack is already aligned and
then realign in every single fragging procedure call is utterly and
completely stupid. Someone should shoot the idiot that put that into
the tree.
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200202052028.g15KSvj29739>