[Bug c++/41941] bad stack allocation using inline asm

2009-11-04 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-11-04 16:47 --- This is called "red zone" and is part of x86_64 ABI. Use -mno-red-zone if you don't like this feature for some reason. -- ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/41941] bad stack allocation using inline asm

2009-11-04 Thread mikpe at it dot uu dot se
--- Comment #5 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-11-04 15:47 --- On x86_64 there's a 128 byte area below %rsp which is free to use without first setting up a stack frame. This is described in the x86_64 ABI document. The Linux kernel skips this area before pushing signal handler stack

[Bug c++/41941] bad stack allocation using inline asm

2009-11-04 Thread freddy77 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from freddy77 at gmail dot com 2009-11-04 15:39 --- Oh... I forgot. I used gcc from Ubuntu 9.10 distro either gcc 4.4.1, g++ 4.4.1, gcc 4.3.4 and g++ 4.3.4 have same issue. The issue does not occur using -Os option (which use push instructions) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/b

[Bug c++/41941] bad stack allocation using inline asm

2009-11-04 Thread freddy77 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from freddy77 at gmail dot com 2009-11-04 15:37 --- Created an attachment (id=18967) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18967&action=view) gcc command output -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41941

[Bug c++/41941] bad stack allocation using inline asm

2009-11-04 Thread freddy77 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from freddy77 at gmail dot com 2009-11-04 15:37 --- Created an attachment (id=18966) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18966&action=view) output assembly -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41941

[Bug c++/41941] bad stack allocation using inline asm

2009-11-04 Thread freddy77 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from freddy77 at gmail dot com 2009-11-04 15:37 --- Created an attachment (id=18965) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18965&action=view) source code -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41941