This is the mail archive of the 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 02:28:27PM -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> 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 <> 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.

GDB, at least the copy I'm looking at, has no support for regparm at
all.  You may just be lucky :-)  It always appears to push arguments
onto the stack (i386_push_dummy_call).

Daniel Jacobowitz

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