From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
To: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, jh@suse.cz, ubizjak@gmail.com
Subject: Re: PATCH: PR target/34001: Incorrect x86 fastcall behavior
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 07:45:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071127024133.GA4746@lucon.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071113183624.GA23553@lucon.org>
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:36:24AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 08:28:55AM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> > H.J. Lu wrote:
> >
> > > stdcall is a Windows feature. However, using different calling
> > > conversions on Windows and non-Windows will make OS-independent
> > > assembly code hard to write. Given that we have been doing the wrong
> > > thing on Windows wthout noticing anything up to now, make it right
> > > shouldn't cause more trouble. We can add a warning when we detect the
> > > ABI correction.
> > >
> > > BTW, on Linux, we use regparm, which is more efficient than stdcall.
> >
> > Like I said, I think this is for the x86 maintainers to decide. But, I
> > think that breaking backwards compatibility, especially at the binary
> > level, is something we ought to think about very carefully.
> >
>
> It depends on how you see it. To me, the current behavior is binary
> incompatible with MS compilers, for which this feature is designed
> for. My patch makes it binary incompatible with older gcc, but
> makes the new gcc binary compatible with all assembly codes and
> object files which conform to gcc document as well as MS compilers.
>
We have changed the i386 fastcall abi between gcc 3.4 and gcc 4.0:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34001#c7
I think we should fix it for gcc 4.3. Jan, Uros, can you take a look
at it?
Thanks.
H.J.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-27 2:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-09 17:32 H.J. Lu
2007-11-09 18:23 ` Richard Guenther
2007-11-09 21:57 ` H.J. Lu
2007-11-18 13:14 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2007-11-18 15:04 ` H.J. Lu
2007-11-18 15:53 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2007-11-12 1:18 ` Mark Mitchell
2007-11-12 8:00 ` H.J. Lu
2007-11-13 10:56 ` Mark Mitchell
2007-11-13 16:19 ` H.J. Lu
2007-11-13 17:09 ` Mark Mitchell
2007-11-13 20:20 ` H.J. Lu
2007-11-27 7:45 ` H.J. Lu [this message]
2007-11-27 9:32 ` Uros Bizjak
2007-11-28 0:45 ` Jan Hubicka
2007-11-28 10:38 ` H.J. Lu
2007-11-16 11:01 ` Ye, Joey
2007-11-16 11:07 ` H.J. Lu
2007-11-16 16:27 ` H.J. Lu
2007-11-13 14:14 Ross Ridge
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=20071127024133.GA4746@lucon.org \
--to=hjl@lucon.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jh@suse.cz \
--cc=mark@codesourcery.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).