From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29097 invoked by alias); 9 Nov 2010 15:34:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 28959 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Nov 2010 15:34:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 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; Tue, 09 Nov 2010 15:34:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBAA82BACEE; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:34:11 -0500 (EST) 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 rJlhkbGLMARc; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:34:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5743D2BACDD; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:34:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 05EAD145B3F; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 07:34:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 15:34:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Matthew Gretton-Dann Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Will Deacon , ulrich.weigand@linaro.org Subject: Re: [RFC] ARM support for Hardware breakpoints and watchpoints for native Linux. Message-ID: <20101109153405.GJ2933@adacore.com> References: <1278510742.9055.7.camel@e102319-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <1278519432.9055.10.camel@e102319-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20101108193530.GI2933@adacore.com> <1289297254.1305.6.camel@e102319-lin.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1289297254.1305.6.camel@e102319-lin.cambridge.arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-11/txt/msg00138.txt.bz2 > So a formal review is not necessary, but any comments on general > approach taken are still welcome. As far as I could tell from a quick pass, the approach seemed OK. There were a lot of little nits (formatting), but I don't think it would take long to bring it to a point where it can be checked in. -- Joel