From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id twrvDKxTtGNBqw4AWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 03 Jan 2023 11:11:24 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 23FED1E222; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 11:11:24 -0500 (EST) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=xdA2FqNe; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5DC31E0D3 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 11:11:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 727603858C30 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:11:22 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 727603858C30 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1672762282; bh=p0//vtkYJiRR+A1pxgpFd6VwRVin2SYbCaK79e+Yxvw=; h=Date:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=xdA2FqNeszRofIBN+8/kEazcBmIVbbuGT0H6KVF2tuqtPXgLLJlFSPQm959sFrB4B 1BZxgkTrnpp3y6QDgh4JOyujW3/MdgmCaCwQr+laVFZJOU6eWfU9Eozcg5uYERogtb do5KFO7Q4AeRMxBRbkjgAbXJ+wdQ9GBWzMit6JhI= Received: from lndn.lancelotsix.com (lndn.lancelotsix.com [51.195.220.111]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5F203858D1E for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:10:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ubuntu.lan (unknown [IPv6:2a02:390:9086::146]) by lndn.lancelotsix.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73D798079F; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:10:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:10:45 +0000 To: Bruno Larsen Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] gdb: add 'maintenance print record-instruction' command Message-ID: <20230103161045.ia4ldkemvsorbals@ubuntu.lan> References: <20221222154338.2223678-1-blarsen@redhat.com> <20230102162645.oudy2wxxtmlm355r@ubuntu.lan> <1a74eebc-2ecd-7334-b702-52185c6820bf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1a74eebc-2ecd-7334-b702-52185c6820bf@redhat.com> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.11 (lndn.lancelotsix.com [0.0.0.0]); Tue, 03 Jan 2023 16:10:58 +0000 (UTC) X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Lancelot SIX via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Lancelot SIX Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Hi, > > I do not think the rest of the test makes much sense if > > [supports_process_record] returns false, does it? I guess that > > everything below this point should be be in the if block. > > > > Another approach might to have the initial test (at the top of the file) > > check for both supports_reverse and supports_process_record and ignore > > the test if either feature is not supported. WDYT? > Good call, but since I do think it makes sense to test that GDB doesn't go > wild even if recording is not supported, I think I'll make the test exit > early here instead. That seems good to me. > > > > For what it is worth, the rest of the patch looks OK to me. > Awesome, may I add your R-b tag, or do you want to see my change to the test > first? Sure, with the test modified as discussed above this seems OK to me. Please add Reviewed-By: Lancelot SIX Best, Lancelot.