merge from gcc

[deliverable/binutils-gdb.git] / gdb / stack.c

diff --git a/gdb/stack.c b/gdb/stack.c
index 9dc7d8598de58bbce1373de224e5b004c542b9c2..db45284727a66834b1eff68ab60e6b1ccc153e9d 100644 (file)
--- a/gdb/stack.c
+++ b/gdb/stack.c
@@ -1854,33 +1854,33 @@ return_command (char *retval_exp, int from_tty)
       if (VALUE_LAZY (return_value))
        value_fetch_lazy (return_value);
 
-      /* Check that this architecture can handle the function's return
-         type.  In the case of "struct convention", still do the
-         "return", just also warn the user.  */
-      if (gdbarch_return_value_p (current_gdbarch))
+      if (TYPE_CODE (return_type) == TYPE_CODE_VOID)
+       /* If the return-type is "void", don't try to find the
+           return-value's location.  However, do still evaluate the
+           return expression so that, even when the expression result
+           is discarded, side effects such as "return i++" still
+           occure.  */
+       return_value = NULL;
+      else if (!gdbarch_return_value_p (current_gdbarch)
+              && (TYPE_CODE (return_type) == TYPE_CODE_STRUCT
+                  || TYPE_CODE (return_type) == TYPE_CODE_UNION))
        {
-         if (gdbarch_return_value (current_gdbarch, return_type,
-                                   NULL, NULL, NULL)
-             == RETURN_VALUE_REGISTER_CONVENTION)
-           return_value = NULL;
+         /* NOTE: cagney/2003-10-20: Compatibility hack for legacy
+            code.  Old architectures don't expect STORE_RETURN_VALUE
+            to be called with with a small struct that needs to be
+            stored in registers.  Don't start doing it now.  */
+         query_prefix = "\
+A structure or union return type is not supported by this architecture.\n\
+If you continue, the return value that you specified will be ignored.\n";
+         return_value = NULL;
        }
-      else
+      else if (using_struct_return (return_type, 0))
        {
-         /* NOTE: cagney/2003-10-20: The double check is to ensure
-            that the STORE_RETURN_VALUE call, further down, is not
-            applied to a struct or union return-value.  It wasn't
-            allowed previously, so don't start allowing it now.  An
-            ABI that uses "register convention" to return small
-            structures and should implement the "return_value"
-            architecture method.  */
-         if (using_struct_return (return_type, 0)
-             || TYPE_CODE (return_type) == TYPE_CODE_STRUCT
-             || TYPE_CODE (return_type) == TYPE_CODE_UNION)
-           return_value = NULL;
+         query_prefix = "\
+The location at which to store the function's return value is unknown.\n\
+If you continue, the return value that you specified will be ignored.\n";
+         return_value = NULL;
        }
-      if (return_value == NULL)
-       query_prefix = "\
-The location at which to store the function's return value is unknown.\n";
     }
 
   /* Does an interactive user really want to do this?  Include
@@ -1935,8 +1935,9 @@ The location at which to store the function's return value is unknown.\n";
          gdb_assert (gdbarch_return_value (current_gdbarch, return_type,
                                            NULL, NULL, NULL)
                      == RETURN_VALUE_REGISTER_CONVENTION);
-         gdbarch_return_value (current_gdbarch, return_type, current_regcache,
-                               VALUE_CONTENTS (return_value), NULL);
+         gdbarch_return_value (current_gdbarch, return_type,
+                               current_regcache, NULL /*read*/,
+                               VALUE_CONTENTS (return_value) /*write*/);
        }
     }