From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3900 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2006 20:08:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 3888 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2006 20:08:21 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from w099.z064220152.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net (HELO duck.specifix.com) (64.220.152.99) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:08:19 +0000 Received: from [::1] (duck.specifix.com [64.220.152.99]) by duck.specifix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12CEFC60; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:08:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Fred Fish Reply-To: fnf@specifix.com To: Michael Snyder Subject: Re: [RFA] replace stub fn mips_eabi_return_value Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:08:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: Joel Brobecker , GDB Patches References: <447E2CF3.4070102@redhat.com> <20060609184026.GC860@adacore.com> <448DBFE5.9040309@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <448DBFE5.9040309@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200606121606.23387.fnf@specifix.com> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-06/txt/msg00162.txt.bz2 On Monday 12 June 2006 15:26, Michael Snyder wrote: > Fred, your similar code for o64 also makes use of register_size. > I don't at the moment remember what the issue was, but I did run > into problems that suggested to me that stack_argsize was a better > choice -- and the change did improve things. > > Any thoughts? Actually I think I just snagged that code from one of the other functions and tweaked it as needed. So I don't have any insight into which function is better. I can give it a try both ways in my version and see which one works better. :-) -Fred