This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes: |> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 10:15:06PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: |> > Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> writes: |> > |> > |> Andreas Jaeger wrote: |> > |> > That interpretation of long causes problems for x86-64 since ints are |> > |> > not sign extented when passed in varargs... |> > |> |> > |> How about fixing this mistake in the compiler with a function attribute? |> > |> > ??? There is no way to find out the right type in va_arg. Either the |> > types match, or you get undefined behaviour. If you pass an int and |> > retrieve it as a long all bets are off. |> |> Adding __attribute__((sane_x86_64_varargs)) to makecontext and make gcc |> promote all varargs into DImode when calling vararg functions with |> this attribute? How do you know whether you are supposed to sign extend or not? Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |