From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-79389-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 9112 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2011 20:28:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 9104 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Mar 2011 20:28:16 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:28:10 +0000
Received: (qmail 15170 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2011 20:28:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2)  by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 7 Mar 2011 20:28:08 -0000
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA] breakpoint.c, update_static_tracepoint, variable same name as param.
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:48:00 -0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-27-generic; KDE/4.6.1; x86_64; ; )
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
References: <4D6D7881.8000304@vmware.com> <201103021612.41676.pedro@codesourcery.com> <4D753DE4.2080209@vmware.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D753DE4.2080209@vmware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201103072028.07436.pedro@codesourcery.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg00502.txt.bz2

On Monday 07 March 2011 20:19:48, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Pedro Alves wrote:
> > On Tuesday 01 March 2011 22:51:45, Michael Snyder wrote:
> >> Note, this is just the simple-minded suggestion --
> >> there might actually be a bug hidden here.
> >>
> >> Comments?
> > 
> > I don't have a tree with UST support handy at the
> > moment, but it doesn indeed look like a bug.  It
> > looks like the function should return the new sal.
> > I'll have to build ust and debug this to make sure.
> > 
> 
> Hi Pedro -- had a chance to look at this yet?

Nope, sorry.

-- 
Pedro Alves