From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21124 invoked by alias); 4 Jun 2014 22:23:49 -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 21114 invoked by uid 89); 4 Jun 2014 22:23:48 -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, 04 Jun 2014 22:23:48 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61E6C116178; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 18:23:46 -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 OAY29aEf5AB5; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 18:23:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B8AC11616F; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 18:23:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 50DE940EB2; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 15:23:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 22:23:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Keith Seitz Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: gdb-7.8 branching status (2014-06-04) Message-ID: <20140604222348.GA4289@adacore.com> References: <20140604171843.GX30686@adacore.com> <538F6859.4010004@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <538F6859.4010004@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2014-06/txt/msg00224.txt.bz2 > > . PR 16253-induced performance regression > > So far, I only heard from Doug who thinks the best option > > at this point is to temporarily revert the offending patch. > > It would be nice to hear from Keith as well, JIC. > > I agree. In fact, I think I mentioned this several days ago on IRC. > The bug isn't particularly nasty/common/important to block a > release. Users have had to deal with it for some time, a little > while longer won't hurt. > > I can provide a patch to revert it from either HEAD or the 7.8 > branch. Just let me know which you'd prefer. [That is, if Doug > hasn't already done so or is working on it, but I know he's very, > very busy at the moment.] Thanks, Keith. Doug was only suggesting the revert, so did not offer to do the revert. Would you mind doing it? Thanks again, -- Joel