This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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, i386] Optionally use %xmm0 to return float and/or double values (take 3)


On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 01:38:28PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 06:41:53PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:
> > 
> > > Calling such functions doesn't work properly in gdb's inferior, true.
> > > But I'd call that a gdb bug, because the debug information is correct
> > 
> > Does the debug information specify where the arguments are to be passed
> > (in addition to where they end up after the prologue)?
> 
> Currently, I believe the answer is "no".  Certainly historically the
> answer has been "no", so GDB can not trust the parameter locations.

So what does gdb do about transparently regparm(2/3)ized local functions?
They apparently do work in inferior calls.

	Jakub


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