Date: 22 Feb 2007 12:22:07 +0100
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 12:22:07 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: -freg-struct-return?
Message-ID: <20070222112207.GA10190@muc.de>
References: <45DCF1C5.4030006@goop.org> <1172131463.3531.226.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <45DD4FA0.5030205@goop.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <45DD4FA0.5030205@goop.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 903
Lines: 22

On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 12:09:04AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > Do we know how many gcc bugs this has? (regparm used to have many)
> > other than that.. sounds like a win...
> >   
> 
> The documentation suggests that its the preferred mode of operation, and
> that its the default on platforms where gcc is the primary compiler.  So
> the fact that it isn't for Linux suggests either an oversight or that it
> is actually broken...
> 
> Do we have much assembler which cares about the struct return calling
> convention?  If not, it should be a fairly easy test.

I didn't think we had any that returned structures.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/