From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id E733B3857369; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:30:28 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E733B3857369
From: "ulrich.weigand at de dot ibm.com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug tdep/29247] [gdb, tdep] ../../gdb/ppc-sysv-tdep.c:1945:
 internal-error: ppc64_sysv_abi_return_value: Assertion `ok' failed
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:30:28 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: tdep
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ulrich.weigand at de dot ibm.com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-29247-4717-9Cga0crlU4@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-29247-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-29247-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gdb-prs mailing list <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/gdb-prs>,
 <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-prs/>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/gdb-prs>,
 <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:30:29 -0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29247

--- Comment #12 from ulrich.weigand at de dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Carl E Love from comment #10)
> Looking at the code from Tom and the comments from Ulrich, it appears that
> we just need to check for floatformats_ieee_quad in addition to the check
> for floatformats_ibm_long_double.=20=20

I don't think this is correct.

The calling convention for 128-bit IEEE floating-point is *different* than =
the
calling convention for 128-bit IBM floating-point, so it's not enough to ju=
st
add to the test, you actually need to implement the IEEE calling convention!

While 128-bit IBM floating-point values are passed in a pair of floating-po=
int
registers, 128-bit IEEE floating-point values are passed in a single vector
register.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=