Re: [RFA] arm_extract_return_value, big-endian

Richard Earnshaw
2002-12-04T10:02:15Z

fnasser@redhat.com said:
> Humm..., I am having second thoughts about this. Isn't the problem
> you are seeing the same problem of not having the values peoperly
> sign-extended?

No. In this case we really need to copy the least significant 1 (or 2)
bytes into the 1 or 2 bytes in the valbuf target. That means doing a copy
from the higher addresses. So in that respect, the patch is correct.

But it breaks the case where the return value is more than one word.

R.