From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: hugh@veritas.com, ak@linux.intel.com, ian.campbell@citrix.com,
jakub@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
jesper.nilsson@axis.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
arjan@linux.intel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix print out of function which called WARN_ON()
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 15:47:21 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0905171529500.3301@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090517.152454.91703958.davem@davemloft.net>
On Sun, 17 May 2009, David Miller wrote:
>
> There is some strageness wrt. varargs in that it seems that the opaque
> object used to reference varargs is effectively an array which
> includes first the arguments passed in registers and then the
> non-register stack args.
I forget what the exact details were, but I _think_ it boiled down to the
varargs save area is always large enough for the maximum number of
register arguments. Fair enough. It used to be that that means something
like 216 bytes of stack-space with SSE registers (8*16 bytes for just
that unused SSE register save).
So I reported that, and my fix got merged (or rather, I think somebody
improved on my hacky one and that improved fix got merged).
But now it still generates a 88 byte stack frame, and only about half that
seems to be used (six integer registers, but the "..." part can only be
five, so you have 5*8=40 bytes save-space, and an additional pointer to
the frame that contains the rest).
So the stack frame _should_ be just 48 bytes, but gcc always seems to
generate either 80 or 88 bytes. I never bothered to try to chase it down,
the code is rather obscure. I suspect it has some "current pointer" too
etc, and there is probably some alignment as well. But I'm sure that there
are entries on the stack frame that simply aren't filled in.
At least with the XMM fix, there's now just a _couple_ of such entries.
> I never got down to the details yet, but on sparc64 currently we
> always eat that extra space
Ouch. On x86-64, it at least _only_ happens in the functions that do
va_start().
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-17 22:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-15 16:17 Ian Campbell
2009-05-15 17:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-15 19:50 ` Andi Kleen
2009-05-16 20:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-17 14:43 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-05-17 22:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-17 22:24 ` David Miller
2009-05-17 22:47 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2009-05-17 22:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-05-17 22:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-18 9:09 ` Ian Campbell
2009-05-18 14:11 ` Arjan van de Ven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.01.0905171529500.3301@localhost.localdomain \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=jesper.nilsson@axis.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®