From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10423 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2009 23:56:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 10415 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jun 2009 23:56:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com) (65.115.85.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:56:28 +0000 Received: from jupiter.vmware.com (mailhost5.vmware.com [10.16.68.131]) by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39C2415001; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.94.141] (msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com [10.20.94.141]) by jupiter.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EACDDC565; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A3AD428.7020809@vmware.com> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:56:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Snyder CC: Marc Khouzam , Hui Zhu , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [RFA] Patch to fix reverse-debug recursion function tail bug References: <4A359C0C.9090508@vmware.com> <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA0797603A@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> <4A368D04.7000107@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <4A368D04.7000107@vmware.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: 2009-06/txt/msg00493.txt.bz2 Michael Snyder wrote: > Marc Khouzam wrote: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Hui Zhu [mailto:teawater@gmail.com] >>> Sent: June-14-09 11:37 PM >>> To: Michael Snyder; Marc Khouzam >>> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org >>> Subject: Re: [RFA] Patch to fix reverse-debug recursion >>> function tail bug >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 08:55, Michael >>> Snyder wrote: >>>> Hui Zhu wrote: >>>>> PING >>>> Thanks for the reminder. >>>> >>>> I added some comment and changed the order of evaluation a bit, >>>> hoping to reduce the performance impact on normal debugging. >>>> And I ran the testsuites, before and after. >>>> >>>> Modified patch is attached -- is this OK with you guys? >>>> Mark, can you confirm that it fixes your original bug? >>>> >>> This patch is OK with me. >>> Marc, what do you think about it? >> I tested before and after the patch and it does fix >> the problem for me. > > Great, so sounds like this one can go in. ... and committed.