This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] Altivec ABI patches
- From: Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>
- To: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>,gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 01 May 2002 11:13:48 -0500
- Subject: Re: [RFA] Altivec ABI patches
- References: <15561.48188.141526.557982@localhost.redhat.com><1020426230236.ZM31350@localhost.localdomain><15562.646.506619.140778@localhost.redhat.com><1020427080809.ZM32701@localhost.localdomain><15565.26939.309256.444181@localhost.redhat.com><npg01effwi.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com><15565.44421.333605.509796@localhost.redhat.com>
Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com> writes:
> Jim Blandy writes:
> >
> > I don't see anything here that prevents vectors from being coerced to
> > pointers to their first element. Isn't there some change needed in
> > evaluate_subexp_with_coercion?
>
> You mean value_arg_coerce()?
Err, ... yeah, that's what I meant. :)
> There is no arithmetic you can do with
> these types. Anyway, you are right I forgot that. My tests didn't
> catch it because I was doing the call by hand after having done a step
> into and finish from the function. The registers still contained the
> correct values from the gcc-initiated call. Moving the gdb-initiated
> call to before the gcc-initiated one exposed the problem.
>
> I'll make sure the registers are trashed between calls.
Gruvi.