From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: janani@linux.ibm.com
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, pgilliam@us.ibm.com, janani@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [patch] Pushing Inferior Function Arguments onto Stack on PowerPC64 machines
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 19:11:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061004191056.GA4000@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061004150034.1xgq6l4picg0wgk4@imap.linux.ibm.com>
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 03:00:34PM -0400, janani@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> I am new to this, so my interpretation might not be completely
> accurate, but the way I read the note below ( a snippet from the GNU
> GCC Manual about passing function arguments in registers) is that
> since PPC64 is big endian, even though the default is to pad downward
> (i.e. right align), if the size if greater than the size of an int,
> you need to pad upward (left align).
You're trying to answer the wrong question :-)
It's not "what does GCC do", but "what does the platform ABI say we
should do". Is GCC conforming to the ABI? Is the ABI wrong, or out of
date, or was Andrew's reading of it wrong, or...
There could be a real problem here, so it's important that we
understand what is _supposed_ to happen before we make a change.
If GCC is violating the ABI, then either GCC or the ABI may need to be
updated. If GDB is misinterpreting the ABI, then just GDB needs to be
changed.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-04 19:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-04 19:00 janani
2006-10-04 19:11 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2006-10-04 19:14 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-10-04 20:19 ` Mark Kettenis
2006-10-04 20:27 ` Andreas Schwab
[not found] ` <OFE88464A1.C58B072A-ON872571FD.006ABA69-862571FD.006C7CFB@us.ibm.com>
2006-10-04 20:26 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-10-04 21:02 janani
[not found] <20041026075115.4A2C354AAB5@stray.canids>
[not found] ` <20041026132924.GA26886@nevyn.them.org>
[not found] ` <drow@false.org>
2004-10-26 15:01 ` backtrace changes current source location Felix Lee
2004-10-27 17:35 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-10-27 17:40 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-28 0:52 ` Felix Lee
2004-10-29 15:22 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-10-29 15:36 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-29 22:07 ` Felix Lee
2004-10-30 0:02 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-10-30 3:28 ` Felix Lee
2004-11-01 4:38 ` Felix Lee
2004-11-01 16:04 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-01 16:13 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-05 8:51 ` Felix Lee
2006-10-04 20:43 ` [patch] Pushing Inferior Function Arguments onto Stack on PowerPC64 machines David Edelsohn
2006-10-04 20:52 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-10-04 19:54 janani
2006-10-03 19:15 Janani Janakiraman
2006-10-03 19:20 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-08-15 13:37 Procedure for large drop? Paul Hilfinger
2005-08-15 14:15 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-08-15 21:50 ` Paul Hilfinger
2005-08-16 2:36 ` Jason Molenda
2005-08-20 22:15 ` Paul Hilfinger
2005-08-22 19:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
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=20061004191056.GA4000@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=janani@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=janani@us.ibm.com \
--cc=pgilliam@us.ibm.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