From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16746 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2012 05:55:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 16732 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Aug 2012 05:55:05 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO 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; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 05:54:40 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E9D1C6693; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 01:54:39 -0400 (EDT) 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 6oKoVeziuEmu; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 01:54:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5B9F1C6659; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 01:54:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 011A214561A; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 22:54:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 05:55:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ARM, commit, RFA 7.5] Fix HW breakpoints on unaligned addresses Message-ID: <20120801055436.GI2767@adacore.com> References: <201207301515.q6UFFSCS012933@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201207301515.q6UFFSCS012933@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.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: 2012-08/txt/msg00004.txt.bz2 > Joel, would this be OK for the 7.5 branch at this point? Sure, as long as a GM is confident about a given change, that is good enough for me. > In general, what's the timeline for 7.5? I've noticed a couple of > other test case regressions when testing the branch on ARM, s390, > and Cell ... The branch was created on July 17th, and the target date for release creation is 2 weeks after that, which would have been today. I thought there was still one open issue, but the release page says we're clean (except for your issue). The easiest for me would probably to create it on Friday, assuming that we don't discover something new by then. -- Joel