On 10/04/2010 11:00 AM, Paul Brook wrote: > Your proposal doesn't make this problem any worse, if anything it's better > because we don't have to device between S_B and PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY. I'm > just noting that documenting this as a hardware property is at best > misleading.
Well, I'm hoping to document that it *is* a hardware property, and remove some of the code that confuses it with an ABI property. There's some of that even within the x86 backend, where the Win64 bits are wrong. r~
