Re: [RFC] Supporting alternative ABIs

[Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>]

Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@redhat.com> writes:

> - EXTRACT_RETURN_VALUE, STORE_RETURN_VALUE, USE_STRUCT_CONVENTION and
>   gdbarch_push_dummy_code gdbarch methods would be changed to expect
>   the type of the function, not the type of its return value.  They
>   can use TYPE_TARGET_TYPE to get the return value type, but this will
>   also give them access to the `calling_convention' for the function type.
> 
> - gdbarch_push_dummy_call and EXTRACT_STRUCT_VALUE_ADDRESS would
>   receive the function's type as an additional argument, to give them
>   access to the function's calling convention information.
> 
> - USE_STRUCT_CONVENTION and gdbarch_push_dummy_code would not require
>   the `gcc_p' and `using_gcc' flags anymore since this information
>   is now given in the function type node.  Due to the way,
>   gdbarch_parse_dwarf2_calling_convention evaluates the `calling_convention'
>   value, all inferior call-related gdbarch methods could simply trust its
>   value.

I was working on the (32-bit) SPARC target today, and wished I had the
function type available, so I'm positive this would be a good move.

Mark