From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21658 invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2011 16:06:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 21647 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Jul 2011 16:06:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-iy0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-iy0-f169.google.com) (209.85.210.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:06:04 +0000 Received: by iyb14 with SMTP id 14so394419iyb.0 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 09:06:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.42.21 with SMTP id q21mr1265924ibe.24.1311177964133; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 09:06:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.217.71 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 09:05:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Mike Frysinger Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:27:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch] bfin: swapped args in bfin_extract_return_value? To: Tom Tromey Cc: Matt Rice , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00545.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 09:59, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Matt" =3D=3D Matt Rice writes: > > Matt> 2011-07-11 =A0Matt Rice =A0 > Matt> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 * bfin-tdep.c (bfin_extract_return_value): Fix swap= ped > Matt> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 arguments to store_unsigned_integer. > > I think this change is good, but I don't understand why this function > even calls store_unsigned_integer. =A0I thought > regcache_cooked_read_unsigned did that for you. most likely because regcache_cooked_read() doesnt exist in gdb-6.6 (which is where the Blackfin port originated). when moving from something like 6.6 to 7.3, it's nigh impossible to pick out all the idioms that have been obsoleted by new helper functions unless you're very familiar with the gdb code base. which i am not :). i can test your proposal and post a follow up patch if it pans out. -mike