This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [64bit] openldap compilation doesn't produce shared libraries


2013/6/13 Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jun 13 10:37, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2013/6/13 Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> > Too bad.  This is a typical problem of projects which have been ported
>> > to 64 bit, but only to SYSV ABI, not to MS ABI.  The problem never shows
>> > up in the SYSV ABI (Linux, Solaris, etc), because arguments < 64 bit are
>> > zero extended when pushed on the stack.  Unfortunately, in the MS ABI,
>> > parameters < 64 bit are not zero extended so the higher bits can contain
>> > any random value.  Here, the uncasted 0 is int, so it's pushed on the
>> > stack with the higher 32 bit set to any garbage this stack address
>> > contains at the time.
>> >
>> > Given our LP64-ness, I'm wondering if we couldn't tweak gcc to zero
>> > extend arguments as well, even when otherwise using the MS ABI...
>> >
>> >
>> > Corinna
>> >
>> > --
>> > Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
>> > Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
>> > Red Hat
>>
>> Hmm, well, we could do that, but it means of course in some cases a
>> performance-penalty.  For preventing some misunderstandings about
>> MS-ABI I have to note that MS-ABI also extends argument also to
>> natural-stack-boundary (means 8 byte on x64).  Only difference here is
>> that no sign-extending is used in general (in oppose to x86_64 ABI).
>> So as quick feature this isn't implementable AFAICS due it has impact
>> on behavior and performance.
>
> That puzzles me quite a bit.  If MS-ABI *does* extend arguments, and
> only the signedness is a problem, then why does (int)0 pushes something
> different on the stack than (long)0?  Signedness can't be the reason
> here.
>
> The only reason I can see for that is that the argument has not been
> extended at all.  Yes, it takes its 64 bit slot, but only 32 bits have
> been written to the stack, apparently.  Am I missing something?

Yes, the save-region.  A variadic-function will store for MS-ABI
arguments to stack from register to save-region.  variadic handling is
stack-based for 32-bit and for 64-bit.

Kai


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]