From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9441 invoked by alias); 1 Feb 2007 17:11:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 9424 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Feb 2007 17:11:57 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from igw1.br.ibm.com (HELO igw1.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.24) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:11:48 +0000 Received: from mailhub1.br.ibm.com (mailhub1 [9.18.232.109]) by igw1.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DFBE148014 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 15:05:51 -0200 (BrDT) Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (d24av02.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.47]) by mailhub1.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.2) with ESMTP id l11HBlVu1593382 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 15:11:47 -0200 Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l11HAfUA000955 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 15:10:41 -0200 Received: from dyn651186.br.ibm.com (dyn651186.br.ibm.com [9.18.227.74]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l11HAfp1000952 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 15:10:41 -0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH] (not) disassembling power[456] instructions in GDB From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: gdb-patches In-Reply-To: <1170289373.26944.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1170289373.26944.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:11:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1170349902.25863.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-02/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 22:22 -0200, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > Comments? Can this patch be applied? Sorry, I forgot to tag this message as [PATCH], and I also forgot to mention that I ran the testsuite with no regressions on a power5 machine: === gdb tests === @@ -180,7 +181,6 @@ Running ../.././gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/mips_pro.exp ... Running ../.././gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/miscexprs.exp ... Running ../.././gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/multi-forks.exp ... -FAIL: gdb.base/multi-forks.exp: follow parent, print pids Running ../.././gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/nodebug.exp ... Running ../.././gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/opaque.exp ... Running ../.././gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/overlays.exp ... @@ -694,14 +694,14 @@ === gdb Summary === -# of expected passes 10845 -# of unexpected failures 305 +# of expected passes 10846 +# of unexpected failures 304 # of expected failures 41 # of known failures 63 # of unresolved testcases 13 # of untested testcases 4 # of unsupported tests 11 -/home/bauermann/gdb-6.6.orig/gdb/testsuite/../../gdb/gdb version 6.6 -nx +/home/bauermann/gdb-6.6.patched/gdb/testsuite/../../gdb/gdb version 6.6 -nx I don't think that the FAIL which went away is related to my patch, BTW. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann Software Engineer IBM Linux Technology Center