From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>,
Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>,
Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] mips_push_arguments(): Make O64 ABI test explicit
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 15:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1020801221807.ZM30183@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com> "Re: [RFA] mips_push_arguments(): Make O64 ABI test explicit" (Aug 1, 5:55pm)
On Aug 1, 5:55pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> /* A non-floating-point argument being passed in a
> general register. If a struct or union, and if
> the remaining length is smaller than the register
> size, we have to adjust the register value on
> big endian targets.
>
> It does not seem to be necessary to do the
> same for integral types.
>
> Also don't do this adjustment on EABI and O64
> binaries.
>
> cagney/2001-07-23: gdb/179: Also, GCC, when
> outputting LE O32 with sizeof (struct) <
> MIPS_SAVED_REGSIZE, generates a left shift as
> part of storing the argument in a register a
> register (the left shift isn't generated when
> sizeof (struct) >= MIPS_SAVED_REGSIZE). Since it
> is quite possible that this is GCC contradicting
> the LE/O32 ABI, GDB has not been adjusted to
> accommodate this. Either someone needs to
> demonstrate that the LE/O32 ABI specifies such a
> left shift OR this new ABI gets identified as
> such and GDB gets tweaked accordingly. */
>
> Sounds like the comment should be updated to mention a few more ABIs and
> confirm that it is GCC that is wrong. I'll assume this patch is withdrawn.
It is for the moment.
If you read further in the thread, you'll see that I've verified that
it's gcc which is wrong. That being the case, more than just the comment
will need to change. (IMO, of course.)
I'll wait a bit for further discussion before submitting a new patch.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-08-01 22:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-31 15:40 Kevin Buettner
2002-07-31 16:11 ` Michael Snyder
2002-07-31 16:27 ` Kevin Buettner
2002-07-31 16:47 ` Michael Snyder
2002-07-31 18:16 ` Kevin Buettner
2002-07-31 18:33 ` Kevin Buettner
[not found] ` <20020801013959.GA15821@nevyn.them.org>
2002-08-01 16:56 ` Eric Christopher
2002-08-01 17:02 ` Kevin Buettner
2002-08-01 17:08 ` Eric Christopher
2002-08-01 14:55 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-08-01 15:18 ` Kevin Buettner [this message]
2002-08-01 15:27 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-08-01 15:47 ` Kevin Buettner
2002-07-31 16:13 ` Michael Snyder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1020801221807.ZM30183@localhost.localdomain \
--to=kevinb@redhat.com \
--cc=ac131313@ges.redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=msnyder@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox