From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30011 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2012 13:45:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 29997 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Oct 2012 13:45:54 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,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; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:45:50 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q9IDjnlf005687 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:45:50 -0400 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-77.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.77]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q9IDeo08024820 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:40:53 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:45:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Andrew Burgess Cc: Tom Tromey , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Display full file path in MI style disassembly listing Message-ID: <20121018134049.GA30950@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <506DB4B8.5030001@broadcom.com> <87a9vl3tq2.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <507FCD17.30003@broadcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <507FCD17.30003@broadcom.com> 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: 2012-10/txt/msg00324.txt.bz2 On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:34:15 +0200, Andrew Burgess wrote: > On 17/10/2012 6:15 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Burgess writes: > > It isn't obvious to me that this only applies to the MI case. > > Can you explain that? > > You are correct, and my subject line is miss-leading. It is possible to > hit this code from cli gdb, but I believe this only happens if we fail > to open the file. This discussion is difficult without backing the patch with a testcase, at least for the cases you want to change (cases you do not want to change would be also nice to check but I understand it may be too broad to cover). Otherwise the "sleeping" patch I mentioned I would like to push again later may likely break this new functionality without noticing it. Thanks, Jan