[RFA] arm_extract_return_value, big-endian

[Richard Earnshaw]

> Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > 
> > fnasser@redhat.com said:
> > > Humm..., I am having second thoughts about this.  Isn't the problem
> > > you  are seeing the same problem of not having the values peoperly
> > > sign-extended?
> > 
> > No.  In this case we really need to copy the least significant 1 (or 2)
> > bytes into the 1 or 2 bytes in the valbuf target.  That means doing a copy
> > from the higher addresses.   So in that respect, the patch is correct.
> > 
> > But it breaks the case where the return value is more than one word.
> 
> Yes, I see that now.  Richard, how about a joint effort?
> Would you be so kind as to fill in the empty else clause?

I think I've already fixed this.  Did you miss my request that you test it 
for me on a big-endian system?


http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-12/msg00444.html

R.