[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support)
From: |
Tomas Ebenlendr |
Subject: |
NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support) |
Date: |
Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:20:42 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i |
> I do not know what NESTED_FUNC_ATTR do or is good for, but I guess it
> is needed for all nested functions. I could of course be wrong. If
> I'm right, I think I saw another function (that currently is somewhere
> in my kill-ring) without the attribute (lua_read or something.)
The NESTED_FUNC_ATTR is need for buggy versions of gcc, because we
compile i386 grub (bootime) with mregparm=3. And there are versions of
gcc that don't save content of one of registers when calling such
function or something similar.
My opinion on mregparm=3 is not good, because this is only obstacle (and
it is BIG obstacle) to use same modules at boottime and in posix-userland.
--
Tomas 'ebi' Ebenlendr
http://get.to/ebik
PF 2004.78714088747
- iso9660 support, Marco Gerards, 2004/10/14
- Re: iso9660 support, Johan Rydberg, 2004/10/14
- NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support),
Tomas Ebenlendr <=
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Johan Rydberg, 2004/10/14
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Yoshinori K. Okuji, 2004/10/15
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Tomas Ebenlendr, 2004/10/17
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Marco Gerards, 2004/10/17
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Tomas Ebenlendr, 2004/10/17
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Yoshinori K. Okuji, 2004/10/17
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Marco Gerards, 2004/10/17
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Yoshinori K. Okuji, 2004/10/17
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Yoshinori K. Okuji, 2004/10/17
- Re: NESTED_FUNC_ATTR (was: Re: iso9660 support), Marco Gerards, 2004/10/17