Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:18:47 -0700
From:      Drew Eckhardt <drew@PoohSticks.ORG>
To:        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: syscall assembly 
Message-ID:  <200012132318.eBDNImh29194@chopper.Poohsticks.ORG>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 13 Dec 2000 18:02:44 EST." <Pine.LNX.4.10.10012131759550.12720-100000@Gloria.CAM.ORG> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <Pine.LNX.4.10.10012131759550.12720-100000@Gloria.CAM.ORG>, intmktg@
CAM.ORG writes:
>Perhaps, but no matter the degree of optimisation, the
>16 byte of space is performed in two instructions. This
>leads me to believe is it most likely a pipelining issue
>for the following pushl instructions. As for subl'ing and
>addl'ing 8 bytes instead of 4, as required by each pushl,
>that can very well be an aligning issue which would seem
>to make more sense for the x86.

pushl puts the operand on the stack and then decrements %esp
by an appropriate quantity.

Nothing needs to be done to the stack before it.

My best guess (if it isn't a bug) would be that it's there to keep the stack 
on a 32 byte (IIRC, this sounds like cache line size for the newer 
Intel chips) boundary when the program gets to open (4 for saved %ebp, 4 
for the char * arg, 4 for the int arg, and 4 for the %eip call pushes 
requires 16 bytes more to preserve a 32 byte alignment) so that in a 
"normal" function without a lot of locals all of the locals are on the 
same cache line.

Two instructions instead of 1 would help to facilitate alignment of the 
return address (I think 16 bytes is a good alignment for a jmp, and 
I can't see why a ret wouldn't the same), and a subl + addl combination
would prevent interferance by a stupid peephole optimizer looking to 
combine addls with the same destination register.

-- 
<a href="http://www.poohsticks.org/drew/">Home Page</a>
For those who do, no explanation is necessary.  
For those who don't, no explanation is possible.


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?200012132318.eBDNImh29194>