----- Original Message -----
From: George Anzinger <george@pioneer.net>
To: Tigran Aivazian <tigran@veritas.com>
Cc: Graham Stoney <greyham@research.canon.com.au>; Russell King
<rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>; Linux kernel mailing list
<linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu>; <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2000 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: Automaticly eliminating redundant zero initialisers
> Soon as you depend on this some OS dude will fill bss with -1s so he can
> tell what was used... or some such. Seems like a bad idea to depend on
> bss being anything at all.
No. It makes sense to depend on .bss being zero. Not depending on .bss
being zero leaves two poor options:
1. waste space in the executable image by bloating .data with zeros
2. complicate and bloat the code with first-time-only initialization
peppered here and there
I welcome an option for gcc to put zero-initialized objects in .bss, even if
it is just a bandage over the real problem.
Regards,
Brad
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 07 2000 - 21:00:08 EST