From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28869 invoked by alias); 7 Jun 2004 19:24:39 -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 28844 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2004 19:24:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 Jun 2004 19:24:36 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i57JOai5020427 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:24:36 -0400 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 i57JOYw15868; Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:24:34 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (dhcp-172-16-25-160.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.25.160]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i57JOYP15602; Mon, 7 Jun 2004 12:24:34 -0700 Message-ID: <40C4C0F1.7090805@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:24:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; es-ES; rv:1.4.2) Gecko/20040301 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, drow@false.org Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] MIPS extract_return_value References: <40BFD27E.6080209@redhat.com> <40C48842.9020706@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <40C48842.9020706@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00136.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney wrote: >> Hey Andrew, Daniel, >> >> I encountered another problem with 32/64 bit mips. Don't know if this >> is the right way to fix it, but it illustrates it (and fixes several >> hundred failures). >> >> The problem is that extract_return_value and store_return_value both >> call return_value_location, but then one of them uses the raw register >> and the other uses the cooked register (which are not the same size). >> So the offset into the register cache, computed by >> return_value_location, has to be wrong for one of them. > > > The underlying problem here is that eabi (32 and 64) and o64 still use: > > set_gdbarch_deprecated_store_return_value (gdbarch, > set_gdbarch_deprecated_extract_return_value (gdbarch, > > There should instead be separate eabi and o64 return_value methods (see > mips_n32n64_return_value for an example). > > If this is done the return/finish code will really be fixed (and as a > side effect return_value_location will be eliminated). Can that be done? Obviously this is the correct thing to do, but it requires more investment than I have to give in the foreseeable future.