From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28873 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2004 19:28:52 -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); 31 Mar 2004 19:28:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.129.200.20) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Mar 2004 19:28:51 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC0AA2B92; Wed, 31 Mar 2004 14:28:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <406B1BF5.1040504@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 19:28:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/hppa] Fix pb in inferior function call References: <20040331041848.GO888@gnat.com> <20040331043505.GA18128@nevyn.them.org> <20040331184744.GS888@gnat.com> In-Reply-To: <20040331184744.GS888@gnat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00768.txt.bz2 > > Thanks. Checked in. > > Andrew asked: > >>> Joel, do you think a pull up of the hppa stuff onto the 6.1 branch would >>> be useful? (it can only break HP/UX so is "mostly harmless"). > > > Yes, I think so. I tested and then committed the attached patch for the > branch (there was one minor edit to make). > > 2004-04-31 J. Brobecker > > * hppa-tdep.c (hppa32_push_dummy_call): Set the Stack Pointer. > (hppa64_push_dummy_call): Likewise. Are there any other differences (such as in the config/pa/ directory?) Andrew