From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12136 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2008 18:22:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 12123 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Apr 2008 18:22:07 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:21:33 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12F04983D9; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:21:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0F1598119; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:21:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JlTJ5-0006ak-AI; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:21:31 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:27:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: MI testsuite fix Message-ID: <20080414182131.GC1968@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200804102102.07722.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200804102102.07722.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) 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: 2008-04/txt/msg00248.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 09:02:07PM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > It is also arguable if that warning has any value, but in any case, > we should be filtering warnings. I am not sure this is true. Warning the user about this sort of thing should imply something really wrong; otherwise, bothering the user (who probably can not do anything about it except report it to us) is not very helpful. And during the testsuite there shouldn't be anything wrong that the user (i.e. the testsuite harness) can't fix. As for the warning itself, I'd approve a patch to remove it. I'd also approve a patch to reuse some of the qOffsets machinery for this, but that would take more testing... if you want to look at that, keep in mind that SEC_LOAD doesn't mean the VMA is useful; you also need to check !SEC_THREAD_LOCAL. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery