Re: [PATCH] PowerPC, fix gdb.base/retval-large-struct.exp

[Carl Love <cel@us.ibm.com>]

Tom, Ulrich:

On Fri, 2022-11-18 at 16:04 +0000, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> > AFAIU, needing -fvar-tracking is specific to powerpc, so we should
> > limit 
> > it's impact to that target.
> > 
> > And it's a gcc compiler flag, so perhaps we should limit it's
> > impact to 
> > that as well.
> 
> No, it's not really powerpc specific - the same mechanism can be
> used on many other platforms with an ABI that uses a return buffer
> address that is not preserved.  (E.g. we're currently looking into
> enabling it on s390x.)
> 
> And given that the flag is harmless if it's available (which the
> test verifies), I think it makes sense to just always enable it.
> 
> (In fact, I think the compiler should really provide DWARF entry
> value records -for simple cases- always, even if -fvar-tracking
> is not enabled.  That would make the problem go away.)

I have run the testcase on Intel X86-64 and it does run successfully
there.

                 Carl