From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 993 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2012 14:57:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 984 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Feb 2012 14:57:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:57:37 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1SEvXJ2028410 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:57:33 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1SEvWJV014529; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:57:32 -0500 Message-ID: <4F4CEB5B.2070109@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 15:40:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kratochvil CC: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix disp-step-syscall.exp on some i386 targets References: <20120227192228.GA15792@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4F4C874E.7060203@codesourcery.com> <20120228084050.GA1296@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4F4CA669.7040209@codesourcery.com> <20120228134241.GA24390@host2.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20120228134241.GA24390@host2.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2012-02/txt/msg00653.txt.bz2 On 02/28/2012 01:42 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:03:21 +0100, Yao Qi wrote: >> It would be better if we can add some comments to explain this fix is a hack >> and why we have to do in this way. > > I hope it is OK this way. Looks good to me. -- Pedro Alves