From patchwork Mon Aug 11 12:51:27 2014 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Yao Qi X-Patchwork-Id: 2360 Received: (qmail 6016 invoked by alias); 11 Aug 2014 12:56:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Delivered-To: mailing list gdb-patches@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 6005 invoked by uid 89); 11 Aug 2014 12:56:33 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:56:32 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1XGp9I-0001MR-Qk from Yao_Qi@mentor.com for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 05:56:28 -0700 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-06.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.120]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 11 Aug 2014 05:56:28 -0700 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org.com (147.34.91.1) by SVR-ORW-FEM-06.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 05:56:27 -0700 From: Yao Qi To: Subject: [PATCH] Support _Complex in hard-VFP abi Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 20:51:27 +0800 Message-ID: <1407761487-9251-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Hi, When we pass "-mfloat-abi=hard" flag in the GDB testing, we see the following fails, FAIL: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: p t_float_complex_values(fc1, fc2) FAIL: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: p t_float_complex_many_args(fc1, fc2, fc3, fc4, fc1, fc2, fc3, fc4, fc1, fc2, fc3, fc4, fc1, fc2, fc3, fc4) FAIL: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: p t_double_complex_values(dc1, dc2) FAIL: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: p t_double_complex_many_args(dc1, dc2, dc3, dc4, dc1, dc2, dc3, dc4, dc1, dc2, dc3, dc4, dc1, dc2, dc3, dc4) FAIL: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: p t_long_double_complex_values(ldc1, ldc2) FAIL: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: p t_long_double_complex_many_args(ldc1, ldc2, ldc3, ldc4, ldc1, ldc2, ldc3, ldc4, ldc1, ldc2, ldc3, ldc4, ldc1, ldc2, ldc3, ldc4) FAIL: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: call inferior func with struct - returns float _Complex FAIL: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: call inferior func with struct - returns double _Complex The hard-VFP ABI was supported by GDB overal, done by this patch https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00686.html but "vectors and complex types are not currently supported", mentioned in the patch. As a result, these tests fail. This patch is to support _Complex types in hard-VFP abi. As specified in "7.1.1, Procedure Call Standard for the ARM Arch", the layout of _Complex types is a struct, which is identical to the layout on amd64, so I copy Mark's comments to amd64 support. Regression tested on arm-none-eabi target. OK to apply? gdb: 2014-08-11 Yao Qi * arm-tdep.c (arm_vfp_cprc_sub_candidate): Handle _Complex types. --- gdb/arm-tdep.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/gdb/arm-tdep.c b/gdb/arm-tdep.c index b6ec456..10e74cf 100644 --- a/gdb/arm-tdep.c +++ b/gdb/arm-tdep.c @@ -3557,8 +3557,8 @@ arm_vfp_cprc_reg_char (enum arm_vfp_cprc_base_type b) classified from *BASE_TYPE, or two types differently classified from each other, return -1, otherwise return the total number of base-type elements found (possibly 0 in an empty structure or - array). Vectors and complex types are not currently supported, - matching the generic AAPCS support. */ + array). Vectors types are not currently supported, matching the + generic AAPCS support. */ static int arm_vfp_cprc_sub_candidate (struct type *t, @@ -3589,6 +3589,36 @@ arm_vfp_cprc_sub_candidate (struct type *t, } break; + case TYPE_CODE_COMPLEX: + /* Arguments of complex T where T is one of the types float or + double get treated as if they are implemented as: + + struct complexT + { + T real; + T imag; + };*/ + switch (TYPE_LENGTH (t)) + { + case 8: + if (*base_type == VFP_CPRC_UNKNOWN) + *base_type = VFP_CPRC_SINGLE; + else if (*base_type != VFP_CPRC_SINGLE) + return -1; + return 2; + + case 16: + if (*base_type == VFP_CPRC_UNKNOWN) + *base_type = VFP_CPRC_DOUBLE; + else if (*base_type != VFP_CPRC_DOUBLE) + return -1; + return 2; + + default: + return -1; + } + break; + case TYPE_CODE_ARRAY: { int count;