From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28881 invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2003 01:04:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 28848 invoked from network); 21 Nov 2003 01:04:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Nov 2003 01:04:33 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hAL14WH04103 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:04:32 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hAL14Ta12177; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:04:30 -0500 Received: from redhat.com (reddwarf.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hAL14NH03145; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:04:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3FBD6497.9040600@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:04:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] mips-o64-extract-return-value References: <3FBC13EC.1040202@redhat.com> <3FBC1782.3000908@gnu.org> <3FBD31F5.6080201@redhat.com> <3FBD3819.1020302@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <3FBD3819.1020302@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00435.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney wrote: >> Andrew Cagney wrote: >> Hi Andrew, >> >> This change fixes 100s of FAILs for mips64-elf, 'cause gdb can't >> find the function's return value. It follows some work that you >> were apparently doing w.r.t. the mips internal register representation. >> >> I suspect that the same thing needs to be done for mips_eabi_extract..., >> but I haven't tested that. What do you think? >> >> >> Ok. >> >> I'll probably try doing something similar for store_return_value too. >> >> >> Rather than doing the same thing for store_return_value, take a look >> at the PPC's "ppc_sysv_abi_return_value". >> >> Grep grep... ah, you mean ppc_sysv_abi_STORE_return_value. >> Shall I fix your change log entries for you? ;-) > > > no? > > $ grep ppc_sysv_abi_store_return_value ChangeLog > (ppc_sysv_abi_store_return_value): Delete function. > (ppc_sysv_abi_store_return_value): Delete. > * ppc-tdep.h: (ppc_sysv_abi_store_return_value): Declare. > (ppc_sysv_abi_store_return_value): New function. Right -- I meant *these* changelog entries: [msnyder@reddwarf gdb]$ grep sysv_abi_return_value ChangeLog * ppc-tdep.h (ppc_sysv_abi_return_value): Ditto. (ppc64_sysv_abi_return_value): Ditto. (ppc_sysv_abi_return_value): Ditto. (ppc64_sysv_abi_return_value): Ditto. * ppc-sysv-tdep.c (ppc_sysv_abi_return_value): New function. * ppc-tdep.h (ppc64_sysv_abi_return_value): Declare. (ppc_sysv_abi_return_value): Declare. (ppc64_sysv_abi_return_value): New function.