From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5391 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2009 17:37:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 5379 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Nov 2009 17:37:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:36:36 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1022010E9F; Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:36:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2FA01086E; Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:36:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N9j1e-0006iB-Gk; Sun, 15 Nov 2009 12:36:34 -0500 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:37:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Paul Pluzhnikov Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Doug Evans Subject: Re: [patch] Fix for PR gdb/10838 Message-ID: <20091115173634.GC23483@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Pluzhnikov , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Doug Evans References: <20091112003504.29C4876D6F@ppluzhnikov.mtv.corp.google.com> <20091112004255.GA26101@caradoc.them.org> <8ac60eac0911111648yf189469t875002ca5cafbefb@mail.gmail.com> <8ac60eac0911131804q379d346fwd192d46f5452b314@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8ac60eac0911131804q379d346fwd192d46f5452b314@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2009-11/txt/msg00335.txt.bz2 On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 06:04:41PM -0800, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > Attached patch fixes that (tested with gdbserver on Linux/x86_64 this time). > The gdb.mi/mi-non-stop-exit.exp test is still failing (regression > since 2009-10-27), but apparently for a different reason. This is fine if you haven't checked it in. Is the non-stop failure new, or just intermittent? I believe I posted a patch to refuse to do non-stop on targets where it won't work, but it was limited to the remote target and I never revisited. We don't have x86_64 displaced stepping yet, right? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery