From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17096 invoked by alias); 13 Dec 2012 17:09:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 17074 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Dec 2012 17:09:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,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; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:09:00 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qBDH8vVs025648 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 13 Dec 2012 12:08:57 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qBDH8sMr023944; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 12:08:55 -0500 Message-ID: <50CA0BA6.5070507@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:09:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Metzger, Markus T" CC: Eli Zaretskii , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , "jan.kratochvil@redhat.com" , "palves@redhat.com" , "tromey@redhat.com" , "kettenis@gnu.org" Subject: Re: [patch v5 07/12] btrace, doc: document remote serial protocol References: <1354876644-25749-1-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <1354876644-25749-8-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <834njxoq7g.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: 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: 2012-12/txt/msg00459.txt.bz2 On 12/13/2012 08:43 AM, Metzger, Markus T wrote: > I will keep the patch in the series until the entire series has been approved. Do you want me to omit this patch when sending out updates of the series? Please keep it in the series. The mechanics of the docs might be approved, but someone should still go over the packet's semantics, and its just to easier on someone looking at the whole thing if things are kept together, instead of having the reader hunt for bits and pieces. -- Pedro Alves