| To: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Large Stack Usage in One More Function |
| From: | Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 27 Aug 2002 12:33:58 -0500 |
| Cc: | Danny Cox <danscox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20020827192704.A27671@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1030467482.1611.14.camel@wiley> <1030467882.16697.28.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020827192704.A27671@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 2002-08-27 at 12:27, Andi Kleen wrote: > gcc isn't very smart in that unfortunately. All local variables no matter if > in a subscope > or not or being dead for most of the function or not contribute the stack > frame. > The only way to get a separate stack frame is to either use alloca() or a > different > function. > > -Andi Thanks Andi, looks like breaking up the ioctl function would be the best way to fix this then. Steve -- Steve Lord voice: +1-651-683-3511 Principal Engineer, Filesystem Software email: lord@xxxxxxx |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Large Stack Usage in One More Function, Danny Cox |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Large Stack Usage in One More Function, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Large Stack Usage in One More Function, Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Large Stack Usage in One More Function, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |