[Openswan dev] FC3/FC4 builds and openswan 2.x

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: Michael Richardson <mcr at xelerance.com>

| Well, I should have clued in that FCx kernels are built without frame
| pointers, so the call trace is really just a guess. On x86 we use
| assembly versions of AES and 3DES --- and that code makes assumptions
| about the ABI (frame pointers vs not). The assembly code can be
| adjusted, and can be conditionally compiled, but medium to long term, we
| wish to just use the cryptoapi code for software crypto anyway.

My assumption would be that frame-pointer/no-frame-pointer would have
no effect on assembly code of an ordinary subroutine.  By "ordinary
subroutine", I mean one that doesn't walk the stack or otherwise poke
inside other routines stack frames.  In normal calling sequences, the
frame pointer is mostly a private matter of a particular routine.
Crypto routines ought to be ordinary.

Can you explain the problem a bit more?