Subject: Re: The ELF ABI issue
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Richard Earnshaw <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/27/2002 10:38:06
> > The TLS register, on the other hand must be fixed (since the value is
> > persistent across the whole thread). If you pick r8 then you will
> > fragment the register ranges, particularly when not inside a shared
> > library. There are different reasons why r9 or r10 might be the best
> > choice, but r8 certainly would be a bad choice.
> Ah, okay. Chris Gilbert suggested r11 to me after I posted my message.
*If* I had complete freedom to implement the ABI from scratch, then r11
would probably be my choice too. However, there is too much legacy use of
r11 as a frame pointer to even consider that one now.
Note that the new ABI won't require a frame pointer, and I intend turning
it's use in the compiler off, just as soon as we can make other tools
(such as gdb) manage without it.