From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 62913 invoked by alias); 31 Aug 2018 17:52:10 -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 62904 invoked by uid 89); 31 Aug 2018 17:52:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:52:08 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DD9D807689C; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:52:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20AB72166B41; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:52:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Eliminate target_have_continuable_watchpoint To: Tom Tromey References: <20180831151159.10583-1-palves@redhat.com> <20180831151159.10583-2-palves@redhat.com> <871sae1rh9.fsf@tromey.com> <87sh2uzgme.fsf@tromey.com> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <256e8f2a-bcf2-0cdd-da58-2cd3f525115a@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:52:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87sh2uzgme.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-08/txt/msg00879.txt.bz2 On 08/31/2018 04:43 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > >>> I think the comment just before this function should also be removed. > > Pedro> I thought it was still useful as is. It's describing x86 watchpoints > Pedro> generically enough before a set of functions implementing watchpoints > Pedro> support that I thought that it's still positioned in a good place as > Pedro> is. WDYT? > > I looked at that but I didn't understand how the comment related to the > nearby code; like I didn't see anything else in that file about the > status register. However I think it's a minor point and if it makes > sense to you it is fine. Ah, I was looking more at the bit explaining that the watchpoints are continuable, so don't need to override target_has_steppable_watchpoint. I won't miss it myself, so if it isn't helping others, might as well remove it. I've done that before pushing the patch in. Thanks, Pedro Alves