From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6523 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2011 10:45:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 6515 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Sep 2011 10:45:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:44:52 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8EAioBn012041 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:44:50 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-38.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.38]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8EAimSf031446 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:44:50 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8EAilTQ010137; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:44:47 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p8EAikqj010136; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:44:46 +0200 Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:50:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 00/12] entryval#2: Fix x86_64 parameters, virtual tail call frames Message-ID: <20110914104446.GA9912@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20110913194306.GA12849@host1.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2011-09/txt/msg00250.txt.bz2 On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:28:10 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Here is attached a diff against the previous patch series. The changes are: > > Sorry, I'm confused: am I supposed to review only the diffs in this > message and forget about the rest of the series? If no, which parts > should I review? I have marked the parts to review with `+doc' in the subject. > For now, here are the comments about this part alone: I did not expect you would review this part but as the original patchset docs were reviewed it is also a possible way, so everything is OK this way. I will incorporate the suggestions and I will reply the specific patch parts with them. Thanks, Jan