On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 08:58:25 +0100 David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Should this also extend to the pread/pwrite syscalls?

maybe ... :-)

> I think my biggest objection to this is that it'll stick another "frame" on
> the stack. For something like this the compiler probably can't tail-call, at
> least not on archs like i386 where the extra argument is passed on the stack.
> For an arch that passes at least the first four arguments in registers, it
> probably can, but I don't know that it will. Have you waved this in front of
> any compiler hackers?

On i386, it doesn't do a tail call as you said.  On PPC64, it takes two
instructions to produce the tail call ...  We could inline
do_sys_{read,write} if it was a real worry.  It should only add 32 bytes
(or less) to the stack on i386, shouldn't it?

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Attachment: pgpvy6skUKrO7.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to