From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-80595-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 8077 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2011 15:39:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 8069 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2011 15:39:22 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:39:08 +0000
Received: (qmail 16317 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2011 15:39:07 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.102?) (yao@127.0.0.2)  by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 26 Apr 2011 15:39:07 -0000
Message-ID: <4DB6E717.7080906@codesourcery.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:39:00 -0000
From: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [common] Merge duplicated macros in linux-nat.c and linux-low.c
References: <4D5E2021.2070107@codesourcery.com>	<201102181546.26744.pedro@codesourcery.com>	<4D5EA533.608@codesourcery.com> <4D612DC6.5010805@codesourcery.com> <m3wriiuutu.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <m3wriiuutu.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg00477.txt.bz2

On 04/26/2011 01:03 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> writes:
> 
> 
> Thanks for persevering.
> 
> I re-read the previous threads on this.  My understanding is that Mark
> is uncertain about the general direction of this, but that neither he
> nor anybody else objects to this specific patch.
> 
> I read the patch and I think merging common macro definitions makes
> sense.
> 
> So, this is ok.

Thanks for the approval.  Run regression test for both native gdb and
native gdbserver on x86_64-linux.  No regression.  Applied to trunk.

http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2011-04/msg00161.html

-- 
Yao (齐尧)