> Without inlining the maxmimum stack usage inside foobar() is
> max(stack usage foo(), stack usage bar()). [1]
It's a little more complicated. gcc 4.x (not sure which x, might 0)
is clever enough to not use max() stack, but only use the stack for the
different scopes as needed similar as when the calls weren't inlined.
But gcc 3 didn't do that.
> With foo() and bar() inlined (-funit-at-a-time also enables
> -finline-functions-called-once), the maxmimum stack usage inside
> foobar() is sum(stack usage foo(), stack usage bar()). And this
> worst case is the area where gcc 4 is much better than gcc 3.4.
Yes exactly. If the functions weren't inlined the problem wouldn't
occur because the stack sizes do not add up in the same dynamic call chain.
Thus a few statetic noinlines will fix it.
-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
