On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Segher Boessenkool
<seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 10:08:01AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> > Maybe something like (heavily cut'n'pasted):
>> >
>> >
>> > @deftypefn {Built-in Function} {void *} __builtin_argument_address (void)
>> > This function is similar to @code{__builtin_frame_address} with an
>> > argument of 0, but it returns the address of the incoming arguments to
>> > the current function rather than the address of its frame.
>>
>> This doesn't make senses when there is no argument or arguments
>> are passed in registers.
>
> Sure, but see the weasel-words below ("The exact...")
>
>> To me, argument pointer is a virtual concept
>> and an implementation detail internal to GCC. I am not sure if another
>> compiler can implement it based on this description.
>
> The same is true for frame_address, on many machines.
Stack frame is well understood unlike argument pointer which is
pretty vague.
>> > The exact definition of this address depends upon the processor and the
>> > calling convention. Usually some arguments are passed in registers and
>> > the rest on the stack, and this builtin returns the address of the first
>> > argument that is on the stack.
>
>
> Segher
--
H.J.
