Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: davem@davemloft.net
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix complex float on sparc
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 17:09:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201109280939.p8S9dSHX024441@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110928.012027.2236138577869370946.davem@davemloft.net>	(message from David Miller on Wed, 28 Sep 2011 01:20:27 -0400 (EDT))

> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 01:20:27 -0400 (EDT)
> From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> 
> Lots of testcase failures have crept into the sparc targets,
> I'll try to fix as many as I can.
> 
> This gets the complex float cases of callfuncs.exp passing
> again for both 32-bit and 64-bit.
> 
> For sparc32 it's pass in memory, return in float regs.
> 
> For sparc64 it's pass in float regs (<= 16 bytes) or memory (> 16
> bytes), always return in float regs.
> 
> Ok to commit?

Looks good.  Just a small request inline...

> gdb/
> 
> 2011-09-27  David S. Miller  <davem@davemloft.net>
> 
> 	* sparc-tdep.h (SPARC_F2_REGNUM, SPARC_F3_REGNUM, SPARC_F4_REGNUM,
> 	SPARC_F5_REGNUM, SPARC_F6_REGNUM, SPARC_F7_REGNUM): New enums.
> 	* sparc-tdep.c (sparc_complex_floating_p): New function.
> 	(sparc32_store_arguments): Handle complex floats.
> 	(sparc32_extract_return_value): Likewise.
> 	(sparc32_store_return_value): Likewise.
> 	(sparc32_stabs_argument_has_addr): Likewise.
> 	* sparc64-tdep.c (sparc64_complex_floating_p): New function.
> 	(sparc64_store_floating_fields): Handle complex floats.
> 	(sparc64_store_arguments): Likewise.
> 	(sparc64_store_return_value): Likewise.
> 
> diff --git a/gdb/sparc-tdep.c b/gdb/sparc-tdep.c
> index faa7b3a..8541a31 100644
> --- a/gdb/sparc-tdep.c
> +++ b/gdb/sparc-tdep.c
> @@ -1238,12 +1258,25 @@ sparc32_extract_return_value (struct type *type, struct regcache *regcache,
>    gdb_assert (!sparc_structure_or_union_p (type));
>    gdb_assert (!(sparc_floating_p (type) && len == 16));
>  
> -  if (sparc_floating_p (type))
> +  if (sparc_floating_p (type)
> +      || sparc_complex_floating_p (type))

I would have put both conditions on the same line, since this is
wasting a bit of vertical space.  Don't see this list growing in the
near future and I don't think there's a significant difference in
readability that way.

> @@ -1281,13 +1314,26 @@ sparc32_store_return_value (struct type *type, struct regcache *regcache,
>    gdb_assert (!(sparc_floating_p (type) && len == 16));
>    gdb_assert (len <= 8);
>  
> -  if (sparc_floating_p (type))
> +  if (sparc_floating_p (type)
> +      || sparc_complex_floating_p (type))

Same here.

> diff --git a/gdb/sparc64-tdep.c b/gdb/sparc64-tdep.c
> index 0430ecf..097f658 100644
> --- a/gdb/sparc64-tdep.c
> +++ b/gdb/sparc64-tdep.c
> @@ -622,11 +642,13 @@ static void
>  sparc64_store_floating_fields (struct regcache *regcache, struct type *type,
>  			       const gdb_byte *valbuf, int element, int bitpos)
>  {
> +  int len = TYPE_LENGTH (type);
> +
>    gdb_assert (element < 16);
>  
> -  if (sparc64_floating_p (type))
> +  if (sparc64_floating_p (type)
> +      || (sparc64_complex_floating_p (type) && len <= 16))

Here.

> @@ -886,7 +908,8 @@ sparc64_store_arguments (struct regcache *regcache, int nargs,
>  	  if (element < 16)
>  	    sparc64_store_floating_fields (regcache, type, valbuf, element, 0);
>  	}
> -      else if (sparc64_floating_p (type))
> +      else if (sparc64_floating_p (type)
> +	       || sparc64_complex_floating_p (type))

Here.

> @@ -1067,7 +1090,8 @@ sparc64_store_return_value (struct type *type, struct regcache *regcache,
>        if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_UNION)
>  	sparc64_store_floating_fields (regcache, type, buf, 0, 0);
>      }
> -  else if (sparc64_floating_p (type))
> +  else if (sparc64_floating_p (type)
> +	   || sparc64_complex_floating_p (type))

And here.

Would appreciate it if you could change this.


  reply	other threads:[~2011-09-28  9:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-28  6:32 David Miller
2011-09-28 17:09 ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2011-09-28 17:50   ` David Miller

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=201109280939.p8S9dSHX024441@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl \
    --to=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    /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