From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32538 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2013 00:33:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 32529 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Feb 2013 00:33:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:33:19 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1UArR0-0006Zg-PL from Yao_Qi@mentor.com ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:33:18 -0800 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-05.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.43]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:33:19 -0800 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-05.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.43) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:33:18 -0800 Message-ID: <512EA59A.5030404@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:52:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: "Abid, Hafiz" , , Subject: Re: [patch] Change trace buffer size References: <1361211216.2217.2@abidh-ubunto1104> <5122E8C9.2070205@codesourcery.com> <512E3A63.9040209@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <512E3A63.9040209@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00718.txt.bz2 On 02/28/2013 12:54 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > I think it's better to have the command behave the > same as the other related "set circular-trace-buffer" > set disconnected-tracing. We've discussed this behavior in > the context of the patch that adds one of these other > commands (or both?). > Do you see a reason this command should behave different? No, these commands should behave the same. > tcomplain would trigger if you used the "set ..." command > before being connected to any target (or after disconnecting). then 'target_ignore' is fine to me. -- Yao (齐尧)