Re: [Bug debuginfod/27277] Describe retrieved files when verbose

2021-09-22 Thread Frank Ch. Eigler via Elfutils-devel
Hi -

> > > > That in turn would require THREE new API functions or a
> > > > stateful set_HEAD_mode_and_return_dev_null one and modifying
> > > > the three main lookup functions.

> > > Yes, it definitely is more work.
> > 
> > So, is that your suggestion?  We proceed with that sort of thing?
> 
> Yes, separate the verbose printing of http headers (which I really do
> like)

(This is now done, more or less, but noting that it is not a
machine-consumable API.)

> from providing an interface to query what needs to be done to get
> some file (is it in cache, can it be retieved from a remote server, how
> big is it?) I don't think providing raw http headers is that interface.

Well, we have gone some way into this on PR28284, on various branches
including nsanci/pr28284-webapi.  It's not complete, yet the "raw http
headers" aspect is still there, because what headers are available is
unpredictable.  But now this is made even more wordy by forking the
_find_ functions into a _describe_ triplet and all the other leftover
work elsewhere.

IMHO it's not an improvement over a single function that returns
headers associated with the lookup.  Please let's discuss this again.

- FChE



[Bug backends/27925] riscv backend only provides return value locations for code compiled for LP64D ABI

2021-09-22 Thread wcohen at redhat dot com via Elfutils-devel
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27925

--- Comment #7 from William Cohen  ---
Created attachment 13676
  --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13676&action=edit
Reworked risv retval patch

I reworked that patch to add lp64f support and added lp64f support.  I assumed
that the lp64f falls back to passing doubles in integer register, but I didn't
see that spelled out in the calling conventions
(https://riscv.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/riscv-calling.pdf).  Is there
some document that describes the lp64f calling conventions?

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