> >>scratchslot = argument
> >>argument = stack frame size - small
> >>sp += argument
> >>argument = scratchslot
> >>sp += small
> >
> > This assumes you have a frame pointer or sp+large_offset addressing mode
> > for accessing scratchslot. In which case you could either use fp
On 21 March 2006 14:58, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 04:03:08PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Do you happen to know off the top of your head when get_frame_size()
>> becomes valid?
>
> You don't get a good first-pass estimate until after all rtl
> generation has been done. Wh
On 21 March 2006 15:12, Paul Brook wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 March 2006 14:57, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 04:03:08PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> Do you happen to know off the top of your head when get_frame_size()
>>> becomes valid?
>>
>> You don't get a good first-pass est
On Tuesday 21 March 2006 14:57, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 04:03:08PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
> > Do you happen to know off the top of your head when get_frame_size()
> > becomes valid?
>
> You don't get a good first-pass estimate until after all rtl
> generation has been d
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 04:03:08PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
> Do you happen to know off the top of your head when get_frame_size()
> becomes valid?
You don't get a good first-pass estimate until after all rtl
generation has been done. Which is later than you need.
Another possibility is to allo
On 20 March 2006 15:14, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 02:56:00PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
>> If the stack frame size is >32kB, I need to use a temporary register in
>> the epilogue to assemble the lo/hi parts of the frame size before adding
>> it to the SP. In the non-sibcal
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 02:56:00PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
> If the stack frame size is >32kB, I need to use a temporary register in the
> epilogue to assemble the lo/hi parts of the frame size before adding it to the
> SP. In the non-sibcall version of the epilogue[*] it uses one of the
> arg-p
On 20 March 2006 14:45, Richard Henderson wrote:
Hi Richard :)
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 12:41:32AM -, Dave Korn wrote:
>> So, what if the decision it needs to make depends on the stack frame
>> size of the current function?
>
> How can this possibly be? When the sibcall is done, the cu
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 12:41:32AM -, Dave Korn wrote:
> So, what if the decision it needs to make depends on the stack frame
> size of the current function?
How can this possibly be? When the sibcall is done, the current
function's stack frame is removed.
r~
