From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24751 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2008 16:35:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 24737 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Mar 2008 16:35:55 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from s200aog16.obsmtp.com (HELO s200aog16.obsmtp.com) (207.126.144.130) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:35:27 +0000 Received: from source ([164.129.1.35]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob016.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:35:22 UTC Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (ns2.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id E886FDB96; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:35:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail1.bri.st.com (mail1.bri.st.com [164.129.8.218]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 62B934C169; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:35:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [164.129.12.194] (bri0669.bri.st.com [164.129.12.194]) by mail1.bri.st.com (MOS 3.7.5a-GA) with ESMTP id CJX26884 (AUTH stubbsa); Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:35:08 GMT Message-ID: <47EBCCBC.8020706@st.com> Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:35:00 -0000 From: Andrew STUBBS User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Markus Deuling Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , Ulrich Weigand , GDB Patches Subject: Re: [patch] Remove comments from user_code in gdb_test_multiple References: <47EBBBFA.4010700@de.ibm.com> <20080327153159.GA8060@caradoc.them.org> <47EBC15C.6070306@de.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <47EBC15C.6070306@de.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg00441.txt.bz2 Markus Deuling wrote: > What do you think about the spu info mailbox patch then ? Move the > comment above gdb_test_multiple ? Or use send_gdb/gdb_expect and have > the comments in the right place? The (?#) directive allows you to put the comments inside the regular expression itself. -re "(?#Older kernels had a bug that caused them to return arbitrary values when attempting to read from an empty mailbox via spufs. )SPU Outbound Mailbox.*0x.*SPU Outbound Interrupt Mailbox.*0x.*$gdb_prompt $" Or, alternatively, the (?x) directive might be cleaner. Note that this changes the meaning of white space. -re "(?x) #Older kernels had a bug that caused them to return arbitrary values when #attempting to read from an empty mailbox via spufs. SPU Outbound Mailbox.*0x.*SPU Outbound Interrupt Mailbox.*0x.* $gdb_prompt[ ]$" This is untested! Andrew