On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 12:00:37PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:Matt Domsch wrote:No reason. I was just trying to be careful, not leaving data in theNo, it's treating the command line as a fixed buffer, as opposed to a null-terminated string. This was always a bug, by the way.
upper bits of those registers going uninitialized. If we know they're
not being used ever, then it's not a problem. But I don't think
that's the source of the command line size concern, is it?
OK, I'll look at fixing that, and using %esi throughout.