Bernd Trog wrote: > By "real" I ment the actual stack usage (which is -Ox dependent) and by > "worst case" I ment by looking simply at the code before any optimization. > > The actual stack usage would be most interesting, of course.
Of course, and is actually what -fstack-usage will report. I had really misinterpreted the difference you made. The reported stack usage is still a "worst case" from a run-time perspective. For instance if the static allocation in a function goes like allocate 256 in the prologue ... some code allocate 256 for whatnot reason (push arg, static alloca, ...) ... the reported stack usage is 512 eventhough only 256 are actually allocated at some points. Hope this clarifies :)
