This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] Supporting alternative ABIs
- From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis at chello dot nl>
- To: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 22 Aug 2003 23:11:38 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Supporting alternative ABIs
- References: <20030822084054.GA1110@cygbert.vinschen.de>
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