Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch/rfc:rfa:doco] Deprecate extract_struct_value_address
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 20:46:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <40157CB6.30803@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4009DBB5.2030605@gnu.org>

> Hello,
> 
> Ref: [rfc] Struct return values
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2004-01/msg00123.html
> 
> This deprecates the existing extract_struct_value_address, clearing the way for a replacement such as extract_returned_value_address.
> 
> As the comments note, other than the 32-bit SPARC, no ABI has so far been identified that allows for the robust implementation of an extract struct-convention return-value's address method.  Further, a quick glance through the remaining extract methods suggests that they too are broken - the're all trying to extract the return-value from a register and typical ABIs don't guarentee that the return-value address register is preserved across function calls.
> 
> The patch also adds a bunch of comments to core-GDB to [hopefully] point the way to the required changes needed to make the 32-bit SPARC ABIs case work.  I don't have a SPARC handy so MarkK, over to you :-/
> 
> Comments?  I'll give this part a week.

I've checked this in.

Andrew


> 2004-01-17  Andrew Cagney  <cagney@redhat.com>
> 
> 	* gdbarch.sh (EXTRACT_STRUCT_VALUE_ADDRESS): Deprecate.  Add
> 	comments mentioning extract_returned_value_address.
> 	* infcmd.c (print_return_value): Update.  Add comments on
> 	extract_returned_value_address.
> 	* stack.c (return_command): Add comments on
> 	extract_returned_value_address.
> 	* values.c: Update comment.
> 	* m32r-tdep.c: Update comment.
> 	* sparc-tdep.c: Update comment.
> 	* ia64-tdep.c (ia64_use_struct_convention): Update comment.
> 	* xstormy16-tdep.c (xstormy16_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* sh64-tdep.c (sh64_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* sh-tdep.c (sh_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* s390-tdep.c (s390_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* rs6000-tdep.c (rs6000_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* m68klinux-tdep.c (m68k_linux_init_abi): Update.
> 	* m68k-tdep.c (m68k_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* m68hc11-tdep.c (m68hc11_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* m32r-tdep.c (m32r_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* ia64-tdep.c (ia64_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* h8300-tdep.c (h8300_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* frv-tdep.c (frv_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* arm-tdep.c (arm_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 	* alpha-tdep.c (alpha_gdbarch_init): Update.
> 
> Index: doc/ChangeLog
> 2004-01-17  Andrew Cagney  <cagney@redhat.com>
> 
> 	* gdbint.texinfo (Target Architecture Definition): Rename
> 	EXTRACT_STRUCT_VALUE_ADDRESS to
> 	DEPRECATED_EXTRACT_STRUCT_VALUE_ADDRESS.
> 	



      parent reply	other threads:[~2004-01-26 20:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-01-18  1:06 Andrew Cagney
2004-01-18  7:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-01-26 20:46 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]

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=40157CB6.30803@gnu.org \
    --to=cagney@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.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