From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19143 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2013 14:19:42 -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 19129 invoked by uid 89); 8 Apr 2013 14:19:42 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 14:19:41 +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 r38EJaBW004838 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:19:37 -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 r38EJZrK025863; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:19:35 -0400 Message-ID: <5162D1F6.5000306@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 17:57:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Keith Seitz CC: Hui Zhu , Hui Zhu , gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix dprintf work not right if it is pending References: <514BF736.3070706@mentor.com> <514C3C85.4000704@codesourcery.com> <514EEBFF.8090705@redhat.com> <5154378D.60302@redhat.com> <515B1DF7.3090705@redhat.com> <515EF6A3.2080704@redhat.com> <51609773.9040009@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <51609773.9040009@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00188.txt.bz2 On 04/06/2013 10:45 PM, Keith Seitz wrote: > On 04/05/2013 09:06 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> Thanks for the help Keith. Much appreciated. > > I'm not exactly sure I would call this "helping." I think I created more work than I actually saved. My apologies for that. That certainly wasn't my intent. You're _really_ too hard on yourself. :-) Pushing for moving this to the breakpoint_ops->re_set hook was very helpful. -- Pedro Alves