From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12386 invoked by alias); 29 Mar 2013 16:19:19 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 12131 invoked by uid 89); 29 Mar 2013 16:19:11 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:19:08 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1ULc1C-0007Tw-CB from Yao_Qi@mentor.com ; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:19:06 -0700 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-03.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.39]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:19:06 -0700 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-03.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.39) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:19:05 -0700 Message-ID: <5155BEAC.7090401@codesourcery.com> Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:17:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Add annex in a async remote notification. References: <1358838232-13319-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1358838232-13319-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <83fw1tod6e.fsf@gnu.org> <511EFE76.4030506@codesourcery.com> <83621ssj6n.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83621ssj6n.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2013-03/txt/msg01115.txt.bz2 [Eli, sorry for missing this mail. Find it hide in the thread when I have a chance to revisit this patch series.] On 02/16/2013 05:26 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Sorry, I don't follow your reasoning. > > My concern was about the following use case: > > . an old MI client that only supports the old "name:event" form > > . a notification is sent in the new form "name:annex:event" > > . the MI client only parses the first 2 parts, and confuses "annex" > for "event" > > How can we be sure this can never happen? We have no idea what MI > clients are out there, they are out of control of GDB development. Patch 2/5 (Query supported notifications by qSupported) is to address this issue. When GDB connects to the remote stub, they will exchange the supported annexes. As a result, the new form "name:annex:event" shouldn't be sent out if the other side doesn't support it. Does it answer your question? -- Yao (齐尧)