On Sat, 6 Oct 2018 at 02:10, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@golang.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Scott Cotton <w...@iri-labs.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 at 23:46, Scott Cotton <w...@iri-labs.com> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks much for the info. > >> > >> Do you have any more pointers about how one may assess whether or ensure > >> that a stack overflow check > >> is not necessary in order to safely use this directive? > > > > > > Perhaps the compiler automatically accounts for the lack of stack > overflow > > check in the functions which call > > a function annotation with go:nosplit? > > If the linker detects a possible sequence of go:nosplit calls that > will use up too much stack space, it will issue an error. But the > linker check can be fooled in various ways. > Thanks. Can you point to the entry point of the linker check in the sources? Are they the same for gccgo and gc? Scott > > Ian > -- Scott Cotton http://www.iri-labs.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
