From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6148 invoked by alias); 18 Dec 2011 06:21:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 6139 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Dec 2011 06:21:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 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; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 06:21:35 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CD32BB06D; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 01:21:34 -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 Y-5t41Bu4ZkG; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 01:21:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D15292BB069; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 01:21:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 35084145615; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 22:21:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 06:37:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] s390*: watchpoints regression [repost] Message-ID: <20111218062127.GE21915@adacore.com> References: <20111217094753.GA20113@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20111217194454.GA15156@host2.jankratochvil.net> <201112171956.33037.alves.ped@gmail.com> <201112172012.57734.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201112172012.57734.pedro@codesourcery.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: 2011-12/txt/msg00588.txt.bz2 > + /* This is the main thread still going through the shell, or, no > + watchpoint has been set yet. */ > + if (lwp->arch_private == NULL) > + return; Just a really minor nitpick: Would you consider putting the comment inside the if, instead of just before? I think it'd be slightly clearer that way. -- Joel