Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Subject | Re: arm checkstack | Date | Wed, 5 Nov 2008 17:13:14 +0100 |
| |
On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Jörn Engel wrote: > On Tue, 4 November 2008 17:06:28 +0100, Matthieu CASTET wrote: > > > > I wonder why the arm version of checkstack only catch stack size >= 300 > > and < 10000 [1]. > > Why doesn't it use ".*sub.*sp, sp, #([0-9]{1,8})" to catch all stack usage ? > > Looks like a bug. And it further looks like Holger just copied what > everyone else did at the time. And the one who started this strange > pattern was: Arnd. > > Arnd, did you have a good reason for choosing the pattern? >
don't really remember what I thought back then. Probably I tried to filter out any function lower than 300 bytes as early as possible and did not think of the >= 10000 case.
Arnd <>< -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |