The AMD GPU support has been merged shortly after commit
4e1d2f5814b2
("Add new overload of gdbarch_return_value"), which made it mandatory
for architectures to provide either a return_value or
return_value_as_value implementation. Because of my failure to test
properly after rebasing and before pushing, we get this with the current
master:
$ gdb ./gdb -nx --data-directory=data-directory -q -ex "set arch amdgcn:gfx1010" -batch
/home/simark/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/gdbarch.c:517: internal-error: verify_gdbarch: the following are invalid ...
return_value_as_value
I started trying to change GDB to not force architectures to provide a
return_value or return_value_as_value implementation, but Andrew pointed
out that any serious port will have an implementation one day or
another, and it's easy to add a dummy implementation in the mean time.
So it's better to not complicate the core of GDB to know how to deal
with this.
There is an implementation of return_value in the downstream ROCgdb port
(which we'll need to convert to the new return_value_as_value), which
we'll contribute soon-ish. In the mean time, add a dummy implementation
of return_value_as_value to avoid the failed assertion.
Change-Id: I26edf441b511170aa64068fd248ab6201158bb63
Reviewed-By: Lancelot SIX <lancelot.six@amd.com>
return gdbarch_tdep<amdgpu_gdbarch_tdep> (arch);
}
+/* 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");
+}
+
/* Return the name of register REGNUM. */
static const char *
set_gdbarch_dwarf2_reg_to_regnum (gdbarch, amdgpu_dwarf_reg_to_regnum);
+ set_gdbarch_return_value_as_value (gdbarch, amdgpu_return_value_as_value);
+
/* Register representation. */
set_gdbarch_register_name (gdbarch, amdgpu_register_name);
set_gdbarch_register_type (gdbarch, amdgpu_register_type);