From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261661AbUJaVg3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:36:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261523AbUJaVej (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:34:39 -0500 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([205.233.218.70]:15880 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261469AbUJaVdw (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:33:52 -0500 Subject: Re: unit-at-a-time... From: Arjan van de Ven To: Roland Dreier Cc: Mikael Pettersson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pluto@pld-linux.org In-Reply-To: <52wtx6vhbk.fsf@topspin.com> References: <200410311541.i9VFf0ah023857@harpo.it.uu.se> <52wtx6vhbk.fsf@topspin.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1099258421.14342.16.camel@laptop.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2.dwmw2.1) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:33:41 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.6 (++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on canuck.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (2.6 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [62.195.31.207 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [62.195.31.207 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 11:05 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote: > By the way, does anyone know if Richard Henderson's work in gcc 4.0 > (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-09/msg00333.html) on laying > out stack variables means that -funit-at-a-time will be safe to use > again for the kernel? unfortunately that's only half the task. It takes care of explicit variables in inlines, but not about spilled variables, which is the problem on x86 due to the lack of general purpose registers.. (and which is why x86-64 can use unit-at-a-time just fine)