From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88534 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2018 19:09:37 -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 87742 invoked by uid 89); 8 Oct 2018 19:09:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:550 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Oct 2018 19:09:35 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77115300177C; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 19:09:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-17.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.17]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A1FB1001F41; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 19:09:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2018 19:09:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: Pedro Franco de Carvalho , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, uweigand@de.ibm.com, edjunior@gmail.com Subject: ping: [PATCH v4 00/12] GDB support for more powerpc registers on linux Message-ID: <20181008190930.GA725707@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20180815000608.26840-1-pedromfc@linux.ibm.com> <87wosqntwa.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <0f08d344-7096-c9fc-6eed-0215d3f63001@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0f08d344-7096-c9fc-6eed-0215d3f63001@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-SW-Source: 2018-10/txt/msg00182.txt.bz2 On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 19:00:19 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote: > I was reading through the series as you sent this. I sent a couple > comments to patches #12 and #14. The remarks in #12 is something that can > always be addressed with this series already merged. Re. the comments for #14, > it would be nice to go over the series and add missing intro comments to > functions, etc. Otherwise, it all LGTM. Is this the only reason why this patch series hasn't been checked in yet? Jan