From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13844 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2012 15:32:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 13835 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2012 15:32:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:32:24 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qA2FWNTZ011732 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:32:24 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qA2FWMrw032510; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:32:23 -0400 Message-ID: <5093E786.2090909@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:32:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121016 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Burgess CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Add fullname field in disassembly output References: <506DB4B8.5030001@broadcom.com> <5085B9D5.80508@broadcom.com> <50913B7F.10707@redhat.com> <5093A785.3060103@broadcom.com> In-Reply-To: <5093A785.3060103@broadcom.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: 2012-11/txt/msg00044.txt.bz2 On 11/02/2012 10:59 AM, Andrew Burgess wrote: > On 31/10/2012 2:53 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > >>> Ok to commit? >> >> Not yet, sorry. This new field needs to be documented in the manual, and mentioned in NEWS. > > Sorry, I should have realised I'd need to do these things. > > Latest version of patch, includes fullname field, test > updates, noted in documentation and in NEWS file. > > Is this Ok? The code looks good to me, thanks. But it looks strange to me that NEWS has more detail on the new output than the docs. IMO, it would be good if, e.g., something around the part that reads: The output for each instruction is composed of four fields: was updated to reflect the new field. The short examples alone don't explain what the field is. In any case, Eli will give you the final word on the docs bits. Thanks, -- Pedro Alves