[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Rep:Re: Rep:Re: [f-cpu] Stack handling
- To: <f-cpu@seul.org>
- Subject: Rep:Re: Rep:Re: [f-cpu] Stack handling
- From: "Nicolas Boulay" <nicolas.boulay@ifrance.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 14:27:41 GMT
- Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
- Delivered-To: f-cpu-outgoing@seul.org
- Delivered-To: f-cpu@seul.org
- Delivery-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 10:27:54 -0400
- Reply-To: f-cpu@seul.org
- Send-By: 140.94.82.18 with Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows NT; DigExt; FR 15/06/2000)
- Sender: owner-f-cpu@seul.org
Stack have a main draw back : it's add a udge dependancies in a single
poor register (the stack pointer).
For security reason, i have proposed to use 2 stack : one for data, one
for code. So buffer overflow will became really hard ! this could be
usefull for performance, too. But most of the time, the stack will use
the register bank...
And that doesn't solve the problem of push and pop.
nicO
-----Message d'origine-----
De: Thomas Lavergne <thomas.lavergne@laposte.net>
A: f-cpu@seul.org
Date: 23/07/02
Objet: Re: Rep:Re: [f-cpu] Stack handling
Have you ever written a compiler ?
A stack is the most simple and clean solution to handle a lot of thing.
We have a lot of register so most compiler simulate the first stack
push/pop with reg but when the stack grow we need a real stack handling.
If we haven't stack we must reinvent the weel or back 50 years ago in
compiler theorie.
The debat about the number of stack is another thing, I think we need
some instruction for stack (pre-dec) on all register so we can have all
stack we need.
Juergen Goeritz wrote:
> No, it's not a stupid question at all. I had the same
> first thought when I read the posting. You may just
> have a need for a seperate stack for the scheduling
> handler.
>
> JG
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Nicolas Boulay wrote:
>
>>Maybe it's a stupid question, but why it's forced to try to simulate a
>>simple stack. There is no hardware support for stack in the f-cpu. Why
>>not using a completely different pointer for such things ? Why must we
>>stuck to the use of one single stack ?
>>
>>nicO
>>
--
Thomas Lavergne "Le vrai rêveur est celui qui rêve
de l'impossible." (Elsa
Triolet)
thomas.lavergne@laposte.net
d-12@laposte.net ICQ:#137121910 http://assoc.wanadoo.fr/thallium/
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/
______________________________________________________________________________
ifrance.com, l'email gratuit le plus complet de l'Internet !
vos emails depuis un navigateur, en POP3, sur Minitel, sur le WAP...
http://www.ifrance.com/_reloc/email.emailif
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/