This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Fix complex float on sparc


> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 01:20:27 -0400 (EDT)
> From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> 
> Lots of testcase failures have crept into the sparc targets,
> I'll try to fix as many as I can.
> 
> This gets the complex float cases of callfuncs.exp passing
> again for both 32-bit and 64-bit.
> 
> For sparc32 it's pass in memory, return in float regs.
> 
> For sparc64 it's pass in float regs (<= 16 bytes) or memory (> 16
> bytes), always return in float regs.
> 
> Ok to commit?

Looks good.  Just a small request inline...

> gdb/
> 
> 2011-09-27  David S. Miller  <davem@davemloft.net>
> 
> 	* sparc-tdep.h (SPARC_F2_REGNUM, SPARC_F3_REGNUM, SPARC_F4_REGNUM,
> 	SPARC_F5_REGNUM, SPARC_F6_REGNUM, SPARC_F7_REGNUM): New enums.
> 	* sparc-tdep.c (sparc_complex_floating_p): New function.
> 	(sparc32_store_arguments): Handle complex floats.
> 	(sparc32_extract_return_value): Likewise.
> 	(sparc32_store_return_value): Likewise.
> 	(sparc32_stabs_argument_has_addr): Likewise.
> 	* sparc64-tdep.c (sparc64_complex_floating_p): New function.
> 	(sparc64_store_floating_fields): Handle complex floats.
> 	(sparc64_store_arguments): Likewise.
> 	(sparc64_store_return_value): Likewise.
> 
> diff --git a/gdb/sparc-tdep.c b/gdb/sparc-tdep.c
> index faa7b3a..8541a31 100644
> --- a/gdb/sparc-tdep.c
> +++ b/gdb/sparc-tdep.c
> @@ -1238,12 +1258,25 @@ sparc32_extract_return_value (struct type *type, struct regcache *regcache,
>    gdb_assert (!sparc_structure_or_union_p (type));
>    gdb_assert (!(sparc_floating_p (type) && len == 16));
>  
> -  if (sparc_floating_p (type))
> +  if (sparc_floating_p (type)
> +      || sparc_complex_floating_p (type))

I would have put both conditions on the same line, since this is
wasting a bit of vertical space.  Don't see this list growing in the
near future and I don't think there's a significant difference in
readability that way.

> @@ -1281,13 +1314,26 @@ sparc32_store_return_value (struct type *type, struct regcache *regcache,
>    gdb_assert (!(sparc_floating_p (type) && len == 16));
>    gdb_assert (len <= 8);
>  
> -  if (sparc_floating_p (type))
> +  if (sparc_floating_p (type)
> +      || sparc_complex_floating_p (type))

Same here.

> diff --git a/gdb/sparc64-tdep.c b/gdb/sparc64-tdep.c
> index 0430ecf..097f658 100644
> --- a/gdb/sparc64-tdep.c
> +++ b/gdb/sparc64-tdep.c
> @@ -622,11 +642,13 @@ static void
>  sparc64_store_floating_fields (struct regcache *regcache, struct type *type,
>  			       const gdb_byte *valbuf, int element, int bitpos)
>  {
> +  int len = TYPE_LENGTH (type);
> +
>    gdb_assert (element < 16);
>  
> -  if (sparc64_floating_p (type))
> +  if (sparc64_floating_p (type)
> +      || (sparc64_complex_floating_p (type) && len <= 16))

Here.

> @@ -886,7 +908,8 @@ sparc64_store_arguments (struct regcache *regcache, int nargs,
>  	  if (element < 16)
>  	    sparc64_store_floating_fields (regcache, type, valbuf, element, 0);
>  	}
> -      else if (sparc64_floating_p (type))
> +      else if (sparc64_floating_p (type)
> +	       || sparc64_complex_floating_p (type))

Here.

> @@ -1067,7 +1090,8 @@ sparc64_store_return_value (struct type *type, struct regcache *regcache,
>        if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_UNION)
>  	sparc64_store_floating_fields (regcache, type, buf, 0, 0);
>      }
> -  else if (sparc64_floating_p (type))
> +  else if (sparc64_floating_p (type)
> +	   || sparc64_complex_floating_p (type))

And here.

Would appreciate it if you could change this.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]