Updated per @ygy/@emaste's suggestions.

Does this look fine?

Sure, this makes sense.

In D27524#615445, @bcr wrote:

In D27524#615441, @mgorny_gentoo.org wrote:

Updated as requested. Note that this shouldn't be probably pushed yet, as it could confuse users before LLVM 12.0.0 is released.

But it does say "... starting with LLDB 12.0.0", so the confusion would be minimal, right?

Updated as requested. Note that this shouldn't be probably pushed yet, as it could confuse users before LLVM 12.0.0 is released.

Thank you!

Fixed per review comments.

That said:

1. I'm wondering if there's a common place we could move this function too not to duplicate it.
2. I suppose we could use a packed struct to look at the float80 instead of pointer hacks.

I can confirm that the patch fixes the LLDB problem too!

I'm currently building the kernel with the new version and I should have some test results in an hour or so.

Sure. Here you are:

To be honest, I think you can call 32-bit version for 32-bit programs unconditionally, independently of CPUID_STDEXT_NFPUSG. After all, 32-bit programs use 32-bit addresses, so they always fit in the shorter form.