From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id jaiCHfpuCmiJlQMAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 13:03:54 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=AHfyl1xN; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 679DE1E0C3; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 13:03:54 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1 (2024-03-25) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1 Received: from server2.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 ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D47E61E0C0 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 13:03:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 695AA3858408 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 17:03:53 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 695AA3858408 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=AHfyl1xN Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F323858D38 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 17:03:21 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 15F323858D38 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 15F323858D38 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1745514201; cv=none; b=QQP+6/sgXPb47Uom3KbCOOEXwJ1qy5kxybH3TR5OKUNw4UapPRsxLiEySk6cTQLv4i/Xtv6xFsxz+9JQY4TqfYrz/F0urBnBKHara+UXfmAACb2G9nuxap+ATGivnXhUJ2D/jVOqS2pMN5BRknwNJfSFkr0V3iBC48gbXDvXC08= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1745514201; c=relaxed/simple; bh=JfhEwORmdzrnjptlzToE7tNKIICEL1BkAItOlctD/a8=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=m1XgW0TFp+R2bCnaYDM1Dexi19T+C5/79AADdHusZ0BF7q1YBRVJebvst3NHEid3KlYrRNJjgHUV4PvJjaq9VbwTpsZe6j1SnItrZQEeroIxnNXEg8iN5JxH+lQk3rofKhe6o3AVlM9FwAf7/xngQMnZwSYtFXv/dMALpD1kwVQ= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 15F323858D38 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1745514200; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=gNMENe+1oLMDY/n9JAbLwy1J0pfbfB+S4SNkhhTXT8g=; b=AHfyl1xNtfh/cGudp54yiuJiyXT/MrEbkzrCBPBs/7NNKBP9HejdzLroEZaKvmEiYIvPjl 2m5BL/a3b7DbY449tOeu5B24sm1cvaWBYQm9K8rEr6b6muFmVC7vg02062zRbN/h4MD86s 4NIn4HZeEx2vEc8c/DmVYajiqf+tPS8= Received: from mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-316-esFE5-sZNL-hfUf2rRafCA-1; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 13:03:19 -0400 X-MC-Unique: esFE5-sZNL-hfUf2rRafCA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: esFE5-sZNL-hfUf2rRafCA_1745514198 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (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 mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B70CB1956095; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 17:03:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from f41-zbm-amd (unknown [10.22.80.67]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E375E19560A3; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 17:03:17 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 10:03:11 -0700 From: Kevin Buettner To: Luis Machado Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/11] GDB-internal TLS support for Linux targets Message-ID: <20250424100311.104bf428@f41-zbm-amd> In-Reply-To: <64bc73f4-cbed-4a2c-a877-0f37ff631020@arm.com> References: <20250424060852.3299179-1-kevinb@redhat.com> <64bc73f4-cbed-4a2c-a877-0f37ff631020@arm.com> Organization: Red Hat MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: HE7TErQOWQ-fzzLbeWx8bR9veg0SZNAikFjn9DtOjwA_1745514198 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 09:20:58 +0100 Luis Machado wrote: > I spotted a few whitespace issues across the series (and git am > also complained about them). Trailing whitespace and > spaces-instead-of-tabs issues. Could you please clean those up > before pushing? Done. > The tests also work fine, failing without the series and passing > with the series applied. > > Just an observation, and not something that needs to be addressed, > but it seems we have many more PASSes than FAIL's in these new tests > without the series applied. > > # of expected passes 1026 > # of unexpected failures 131 > > Makes me wonder if gdb should start moving towards not flagging a PASS > for every little supporting operation we have to do to validate > a particular feature. That would make a PASS mean something is really > working as opposed to some trivial command that just got executed as > a sync point. > > Anyway... > > Tested-By: Luis Machado > Approved-By: Luis Machado I've pushed this series. Thanks for testing and the review! Kevin