Matt Thomas wrote: > On Nov 25, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Antti Kantee wrote: > > > On Fri Nov 26 2010 at 01:50:11 +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote: > >> but shouldn't we fix stub first, then discuss pros and blah of the change? > >> Current binaries have not worked at all on MIPS1 since the last December. > > > > Like I said, I don't have strong feelings about this. > > > > If you want to fix stubs, go for it! > > (there's no need for a discussion after that, anyway, since the issue > > is decided and fixed) > > Please don't. I've changed the mips1 syscall handler to save t0-t2 > just like the mips3+ handler does.
Why is it necessary to save three extra regs for every syscall, when only two syscalls actually use t0? Callers of the syscalls don't expect t0-t3 to be saved. Also, why go to the effort of saving t0-t2 and not t3 as well? Surely that violates POLA? Cheers, Simon.