From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9992 invoked by alias); 24 Sep 2009 17:54:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 9982 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Sep 2009 17:54:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:54:00 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11C5F2BABB1; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:53:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id hXVneZjS4urk; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:53:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74B352BABAF; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:53:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 121ECF593C; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:53:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:54:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pierre Muller Cc: 'Eli Zaretskii' , 'Mark Kettenis' , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA-v3] Fix a windows bug if two watchpoints are used Message-ID: <20090924175356.GF2112@adacore.com> References: <000001c9e4de$6e550cb0$4aff2610$@u-strasbg.fr> <000301c9e4e6$b40c5d50$1c2517f0$@u-strasbg.fr> <001501c9e523$feffc1c0$fcff4540$@u-strasbg.fr> <000301c9eed3$c7239d80$556ad880$@u-strasbg.fr> <20090622205616.GD7766@adacore.com> <000301ca3b83$d15fee00$741fca00$@u-strasbg.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <000301ca3b83$d15fee00$741fca00$@u-strasbg.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-09/txt/msg00751.txt.bz2 > PS: I tested the patch on Compile Farm, on a amd64 linux, > no failure on new watchpoints.exp test, > nor on CVS head nor with patched version. I just wanted to make sure that this is relevant to amd64 as well as i386... Otherwise, it'd be nice if you could test it on x86 as well before committing to the branch (being paranoid, sorry). Thanks! -- Joel