From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=aAEk=67=lancelotsix.com=lsix@sourceware.org>
Received: from lndn.lancelotsix.com (lndn.lancelotsix.com [51.195.220.111])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED1573858C2C
	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Tue,  7 Mar 2023 19:12:24 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org ED1573858C2C
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=lancelotsix.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lancelotsix.com
Received: from ubuntu.lan (unknown [IPv6:2a02:390:9086::635])
	by lndn.lancelotsix.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2A8E28739B;
	Tue,  7 Mar 2023 19:12:24 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lancelotsix.com;
	s=2021; t=1678216344;
	bh=t/giavKIwvNVIP7GXyRzEOF0+fyjGg8P4g9EZWdmAvU=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
	b=S0gnqG7x8MbeMyeJPa1XSeA6ZnkpWkJ9+paM3G5UbNZSEqtWgtXwhJB4/9b0S5Rn+
	 ouGaEylwNyCtGd3gBbbbeyHtCES4xxUEmcmYh7u4VGX+silQ+W8gqhpTzDm+lg9Zdw
	 f5/wgjaC+PA3KBbqrVCLdXiy+cm2znRDEC9kkKk29dCSYvjCKxbVjw8t13jzO5kALu
	 77wYfMta8jNKSqNoZuDVn/bOqMw4pKed35r6WB0CaEzs3eFDsVWOR4Gars4VY/WH4F
	 rFgPRvtOc9jWw7GtyfPO8NfTtgkTC7D2Y2PB/RPXa/PkoH3brP5VBUP6+QHRXSn4dE
	 Rk5XT6jnEAvUg==
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 19:12:19 +0000
From: Lancelot SIX <lsix@lancelotsix.com>
To: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb/amdgpu: provide dummy implementation of
 gdbarch_return_value_as_value
Message-ID: <20230307191207.jz6462fjgta7nkxc@ubuntu.lan>
References: <20230306214650.1744872-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
 <20230307104556.6irap5z2epv7ppxq@ubuntu.lan>
 <5f905345-15a1-d7e0-f8b5-221997fcd1ac@polymtl.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5f905345-15a1-d7e0-f8b5-221997fcd1ac@polymtl.ca>
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.11 (lndn.lancelotsix.com [0.0.0.0]); Tue, 07 Mar 2023 19:12:24 +0000 (UTC)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>

On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 09:47:15AM -0500, Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/7/23 05:45, Lancelot SIX wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> > 
> >> +/* Dummy implementation of gdbarch_return_value_as_value.  */
> >> +
> >> +static return_value_convention
> >> +amdgpu_return_value_as_value (gdbarch *arch, value *function, type *valtype,
> >> +			      regcache *regcache, value **read_value,
> >> +			      const gdb_byte *writebuf)
> >> +{
> >> +  gdb_assert_not_reached ("not implemented");
> > 
> > Isn't "error" more appropriate here?  We just need to indicate that the
> > current hook failed.  GDB is not in an inconsistent state.
> 
> In my original patch, I made these hooks optional, and added some
> predicate checks:
> 
>   if (!gdbarch_return_value_as_value_p (gdbarch))
>     error_arch_no_return_value (gdbarch);
> 
> The feedback was that throwing errors at some of these places (like
> during event handling) would probably put GDB in a bad state.  Erroring
> out of amdgpu_return_value_as_value would be the same.
>

Hi,

Sorry I missed that, I am a bit behind on reading the ML.

> 
> Yes, that's my experience.  The AMD GPU port upstream is too barebones
> to use these commands.  And it's just temporary.

FWIW, this LGTM.

I have tested this and it solves the original issue you have seen.

Reviewed-By: Lancelot SIX <lancelot.six@amd.com>

Best,
Lancelot.

> 
> Simon