Re: [ECOS] Stack access violations in eCos

[Larice Robert <larice at vidisys dot de>]

> Renaming CYGBLD_ANNOTATE_ALIGNED is just a search and replace. And I've 
> done what I can to help with the ChangeLog!

i've done so, will send it a bit later.

> CYGBLD_ATTRIB_ALIGN should stay as it is, accepting an argument. We're 
> adding a new CYGBLD_ATTRIB_ALIGNED macro that takes the maximum alignment 
> required for a thread stack. Perhaps the best thing to do is in fact to 
> rename your CYGBLD_ANNOTATE_ALIGNED to CYGBLD_ATTRIB_ALIGNED_MAX to make 
> this intention clearer.

meanwhile i've learned a possibility how to change the definition of
CYGBLD_ATTRIB_ALIGN in such a way as to allow no argument.

-#define CYGBLD_ATTRIB_ALIGN(__align__)    __attribute__((aligned(__align__)))
+#define CYGBLD_ATTRIB_ALIGN(__align__...) __attribute__((aligned(__align__)))

makes it possible to write
char stack[200] CYGBLD_ATTRIB_ALIGN();
and gcc will decide itself whats neccesairy

do you accept and or like this change ?

or would you prefer something like
char stack[200] CYGBLD_ATTRIB_ALIGN(CYGARC_ALIGNMENT);
not so beautiful i think

Robert Larice

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss