lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: stack overflow on Sparc64
From
From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:22:33 -0400 (EDT)

> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, David Miller wrote:
>
> > From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >> I agree on both counts. Although I'm curious what the average stack
> >> frame sizes look like on x86_64 and i386, and also how this area
> >> appears on powerpc.
> >
> > I also one to mention in passing that another thing we can do to
> > help deep call stack sizes is to make call chains more tail-call
> > friendly when possible.
>
> ... and remove -fno-optimize-sibling-calls?:
>
> Makefile:
> ifdef CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER
> KBUILD_CFLAGS += -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fno-optimize-sibling-calls
> else
> KBUILD_CFLAGS += -fomit-frame-pointer
> endif
>
> --- maybe it could be better to remove it, instead of some inlining that I
> made. Or do you see a situation when for debugging purpose, user would
> want -fno-optimize-sibling-calls?

Yes for debugging and other things it has to stay.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-21 00:31    [W:0.093 / U:1.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site