> On Sep 17,  5:54pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> 
>> If nothing else I'd really like a comment on the general approach taken 
>> - the netbsd function wrapping a more generic method,
> 
> 
> What are you referring to here?  I looked at the netbsd portion of
> your patch and I don't see what you're referring to.  I do see
> that your using the ppc_sys_v_abi_... version for extract_return_value
> and store_return_value.  But I think that's okay until we find that
> it's broken in ways not already handled by the code you've just added.

Just that.  Wrapping the more generic method.

> (This is different than the case that I commented on previously -- In
> which it appeared that code for one ABI was reusable by another.  In
> such a case, I think clearly distinguishing the code implementing the
> two ABIs is a good idea.  For NetBSD, it's supposed to be implementing
> the System V ABI, right?  That being the case, I think it's just fine
> to do things the way you've arranged it.)
> 
> 
>> and a better word than "broken" I guess.
> 
> 
> At the moment, I can't think of anything better.  (Or, to put it another
> way, anything that I've thought of ends up being overly verbose.)
> 
> Anyway, your patch looks okay to me.  Feel free to check it in.

Here is a revised version.  It's now implemented using a wrapped 
..._return_value.

Still ok?

Andrew