RE: RFC: x86 Linux stack alignment requirement

2006-06-07 Thread Menezes, Evandro
> There are 2 different, but related questions: > > 1. Should Linux require gcc generates 16byte aligned stack? > 2. How should Linux support 4byte alignment code? Independently of Linux, GCC could align the stack at 16 bytes and still be compliant with the psABI. It could also wrap memalign as

Re: RFC: x86 Linux stack alignment requirement

2006-06-07 Thread H. J. Lu
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 06:43:50PM +0200, Sandro Tolaini wrote: > > On 07/giu/2006, at 18:22, H. J. Lu wrote: > > >The x86 psABI is very old and doesn't cover XMM registers. I'd like to > >update x86 Linux calling convention for XMM register usage. I am not > >sure if I should update stack alignm

Re: RFC: x86 Linux stack alignment requirement

2006-06-07 Thread Sandro Tolaini
On 07/giu/2006, at 18:22, H. J. Lu wrote: The x86 psABI is very old and doesn't cover XMM registers. I'd like to update x86 Linux calling convention for XMM register usage. I am not sure if I should update stack alignment requirement. Maybe you'll want to check how this is handled in Darwin/x

RFC: x86 Linux stack alignment requirement

2006-06-07 Thread H. J. Lu
The x86 psABI is very old and doesn't cover XMM registers. I'd like to update x86 Linux calling convention for XMM register usage. I am not sure if I should update stack alignment requirement. The x86 psABI only requires 4 byte aligned stack. But the current gcc assumes that the satck of a functio