4 ms·
That'll make it more stack efficient too since it doesn't have to go through the same dance for a function call. It probably didn't do them while adhering to t
by simcop2387 6y ago
That'll make it more stack efficient too since it doesn't have to go through the same dance for a function call. It probably didn't do them while adhering to the C ABI but it'd still put at least a return address and I suspect some registers during the call.
- saagarjha 6y agoThere’s no need, though: the entry point and return address are unique; it’s literally code that is sliced out, jumped to, and it jumps back to the function it was cut out of. The only thing you’d need to save is a register or two if you can’t make the jump without doing some math.
- quotemstr 6y agoX86 should always be able to jump directly, and ARM sets aside x16 and x17 just for this kind of math. But all jumps should be PC relative, so you shouldn't have to clobber anything anyway