Re: [PATCH] tracepoint.c

Klee Dienes
2002-01-08T23:25:59Z

> Ah, I think we've had a communication breakdown. I thought that
> your
> previous patch was defunct, and we were waiting for you to resubmit
> it.
> Rereading the old thread, I can see where I lost continuity. Sorry
> for
> the confusion -- can we start again?
>
> I actually liked the 'save-breakpoints' command, and was thinking
> of pinging you to see when you planned to resubmit it. But I don't
> like it being grouped together with the 'future-break' command.
> They're really separate, though related, and I'd rather consider
> separate functionalities separately. Besides, the two together
> make a really huge patch, one that it's difficult to review
> line by line.

OK, that's fair. My main reason for combining the patches was that
they had mutual dependencies on each other ('save-breakpoints' knows
about 'future' breakpoints so that it can save and restore them; the
future-break code knows about the 'original-flags' field added by
'save-breakpoints'). But I can probably remove the future-break
support from the 'save-breakpoints' command, and resubmit future-break
once 'save-breakpoints' is committed.

> As for the change to tracepoints, I had that sitting in my source
> tree from your earlier submission, and I was just cleaning up loose
> ends. I decided to make sure that didn't get lost, while waiting
> for you to resubmit your patch. Sorry if I jumped the gun on you.

Anything that reduces the size of our diffs is a win from my
perspective; I just wanted to make sure I was understanding the
process properly.

> If a week goes by without a response, you should ping the list.
> We might have gotten distracted ourselves, or there could be a
> misunderstanding such as this one.

OK, will do. I believe there's only one other patch outstanding at
this point; I'm just eager to get it resolved, since it's holding up
some of our more interesting Objective-C patches. I'll send a ping
now; thanks for the advice!