From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12590 invoked by alias); 7 May 2014 16:46:16 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 12578 invoked by uid 89); 7 May 2014 16:46:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 07 May 2014 16:46:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F124411619B; Wed, 7 May 2014 12:46:12 -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 IvNYPxCNDFyT; Wed, 7 May 2014 12:46:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C844D116181; Wed, 7 May 2014 12:46:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CDB8CE0447; Wed, 7 May 2014 09:46:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 16:46:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Kyle McMartin Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv5] aarch64: detect atomic sequences like other ll/sc architectures Message-ID: <20140507164611.GD4063@adacore.com> References: <20140424183510.GI7588@redacted.bos.redhat.com> <20140430160450.GE2148@redacted.bos.redhat.com> <20140507135217.GC4063@adacore.com> <20140507151022.GQ674@redacted.bos.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140507151022.GQ674@redacted.bos.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00071.txt.bz2 > > AndrewP said that the code is always LE, so why not just use > > BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE in this case, rather than go through > > byte_order_for_code? > > > > Seemed sensible to do what aarch64_analyze_prologue did, rather than > hard code it... I'm happy one way or another though. Hmmm, true. It doesn't matter all that much, I think, and yours has indeed the advantate of consistency. I pushed your patch. For future submissions, may I make a request? Would you mind including the revision log as part of the email when sending your patches? I went through all versions of the patch that were sent, and couldn't find a description of the problem. We try to have those in the revision log to avoid having to re-locate the patches in the mailing-list when searching for the reasons behind the patch. The nice side-effect of following this approach is that submitting the patch is just a matter of "git send-email"-ing it, and for me, pushing the patch is just a matter of "git am" + "git push" (with a possible update to add the ChangeLog entries). Thanks again! -- Joel