From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2590 invoked by alias); 31 May 2012 13:34:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 2079 invoked by uid 22791); 31 May 2012 13:34:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,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; Thu, 31 May 2012 13:34:12 +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 q4VDY8GD009593 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 31 May 2012 09:34:08 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4VDY7gm009906; Thu, 31 May 2012 09:34:07 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC7734E.5020401@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 13:34:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] define and check itset References: <1338470075-12254-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1338470075-12254-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <1338470075-12254-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> 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: 2012-05/txt/msg01083.txt.bz2 On 05/31/2012 02:14 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > This patch is almost from Pedro's patch, with some minor fixes for the > new GDB code base and removal of command 'itfocus'. What good does it do to put this in ahead of its prerequisites? Can we please stop trying to put the cart before the horse? I'm trying to help with the async stuff, but the constant push in trying to put other bits in first frustrates me. :-/ The itsets bits need to be last. I'm not even sure the syntax is what we want to end up with at all. Last I touched them, I had wanted to spend a while trying to unify the concept of "current thread" with the itset. There's a disconnect that gets in the way a bit. -- Pedro Alves