From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2703 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2007 12:31:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 2693 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Sep 2007 12:31:42 -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; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:31:30 +0000 Received: from mailhub1.br.ibm.com (mailhub1 [9.18.232.109]) by igw1.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 310A614833B for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 09:13:45 -0300 (BRT) Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (d24av01.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.46]) by mailhub1.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l85CVRe92207982 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 09:31:27 -0300 Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l85CVQEe006440 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 09:31:26 -0300 Received: from [9.18.238.24] ([9.18.238.24]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l85CVPmk006403; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 09:31:26 -0300 Subject: Re: [patch 0/1] Threaded Watchpoints From: Luis Machado Reply-To: luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20070905020350.GA10025@caradoc.them.org> References: <1187013078.4346.9.camel@localhost> <1187631217.11176.8.camel@localhost> <1187631568.11176.11.camel@localhost> <20070905020350.GA10025@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:31:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1188995481.4879.5.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 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: 2007-09/txt/msg00076.txt.bz2 > Hi Luis, > > I just wanted to let you know this hasn't been forgotten. There are a > couple of problems with this submission, and I'm working on a new > version of it. The problem that made me take another try is that when > we last discussed the patch we eventually concluded that this was a > bad (and avoidable) use of observers. The problem that's giving me > a headache is I can't work out what a lot of the independent parts > of this patch are supposed to do... > > I'll be in touch, hopefully in the next few days. Hi Daniel, Yes, i remember the observer's problem in that discussion, but as the thread stopped abruptly, i didn't have a clear idea of the way it should've been done. I added the ppc piece together with the s390's, ia64's and amd64's code in the first patch. I believe the second one is a bit more complicated because it works with bits and pieces of the i386 code, which i'm not really familiar with, so it was a plain refresh of Jeff's patch. If i can be of any help on those, feel free to contact me in the available ways, i'm on IRC as well. Looking forward to your comments. Thanks for reviewing it. Regards, -- Luis Machado IBM Linux Technology Center e-mail: luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com