From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264586AbUEaJ1y (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 May 2004 05:27:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264588AbUEaJ1y (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 May 2004 05:27:54 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:63619 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264586AbUEaJ1x (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 May 2004 05:27:53 -0400 Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 02:27:13 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Peter Osterlund Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.7-rc2 Message-Id: <20040531022713.1e6985ef.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Peter Osterlund wrote: > > If I put "#if 0" around the *wdata assignment in nfs_writepage_sync, > the stack usage goes down to 36, so it looks like gcc is building a > temporary structure on the stack and then copies the whole thing to > *wdata. aww, crap. > Does this construct save stack space for any version of gcc? Maybe the > code should be changed to do a memset() followed by explicit > initialization of the non-zero member variables instead. yes, we should do that.