From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12886 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2007 14:50:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 12876 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Apr 2007 14:50:35 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from dmz.mips-uk.com (HELO dmz.mips-uk.com) (194.74.144.194) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:50:29 +0100 Received: from internal-mx1 ([192.168.192.240] helo=ukservices1.mips.com) by dmz.mips-uk.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Hdp0a-0008OY-00; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:50:16 +0100 Received: from perivale.mips.com ([192.168.192.200]) by ukservices1.mips.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Hdp0Q-0001Cg-00; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:50:06 +0100 Received: from macro (helo=localhost) by perivale.mips.com with local-esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hdp0Q-0006Tv-FL; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:50:06 +0100 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 14:56:00 -0000 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Daniel Jacobowitz cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Nigel Stephens , "Maciej W. Rozycki" Subject: Re: mips-tdep.c: FP varargs fixes In-Reply-To: <20070410154430.GG10890@caradoc.them.org> Message-ID: References: <200703231449.l2NEnQSb031165@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20070410154430.GG10890@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-MIPS-Technologies-UK-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MIPS-Technologies-UK-MailScanner-From: macro@mips.com 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: 2007-04/txt/msg00254.txt.bz2 On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > If you really want to build up some bonus points, you could extend the > argument passing testcases to trigger some of these cases :-) I think gdb.base/funcargs.exp and gdb.base/varargs.exp should already cover the interesting combinations and I would suggest that only if any new problem pops up, they should get updated to take it into account. > Yes, this is OK. I'll just trust you on the underlying ABI issues, > since you know it better than I do. It all looks sane. Well, GCC is the definite reference in this case and it seems to be getting things right. Applied now. Maciej