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 E2A52385840A; Wed,  7 Sep 2022 17:16:05 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E2A52385840A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org;
	s=default; t=1662570965;
	bh=AUGq4PQVo3NVq8jzeBP9+lkbMnIM9+DfAx9uOF3L9EI=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=Vi8ov/2R85fPTyaoKj4IYqDOyjbGCUIMtMq1lwqhaLBfyR2oJFzLrcj7JPhtzHwW8
	 Nm95KTIfX0NhoAIwpqOtJv2ztv/qiyK5FahylW8oV4y3+WRAvpZwY14eXyRbXJTnRU
	 vZ4Z+SQjfn67NFvAisqiFoY8MSqtXXBRVwplZpAs=
From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug tdep/29543] [gdb/tdep, ppc] inferior call with long double
 vararg not handled correctly
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2022 17:16:05 +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: HEAD
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: vries at gcc dot gnu.org
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-29543-4717-jfJIWT6ZBq@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-29543-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-29543-4717@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
List-Id: <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29543

--- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Carl E Love from comment #11)
> I got back from vacation yesterday.=20

Welcome back :)

> I started looking at this to see what
> Ulrich was talking about.  I was able to reproduce the initial error and
> verify the change that Tom proposed fixes the issue.  I can try the lasted
> patch from Tom to see if I can get the test case for the second issue that
> Ulrich mentioned to fail and then verify if Tom's changes fix it.

Ok, waiting for your feedback then, thanks.

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