From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25772 invoked by alias); 23 May 2013 17:44:44 -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 25762 invoked by uid 89); 23 May 2013 17:44:44 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_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; Thu, 23 May 2013 17:44:43 +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 r4NHigXC011849 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 23 May 2013 13:44:42 -0400 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 r4NHifsb022100; Thu, 23 May 2013 13:44:41 -0400 Message-ID: <519E5588.3040808@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 17:44:00 -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: Tom Tromey CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 V3] target-assisted range stepping References: <20130514191026.13213.39574.stgit@brno.lan> <87k3n148ji.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87k3n148ji.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00886.txt.bz2 On 05/14/2013 09:21 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > > Pedro> It took a while, but finally here's my take on the range stepping > Pedro> series. This is based on Yao's v1 and v2 series, so I'm calling it > Pedro> v3. The gist of the feature is the same, although the implementation > Pedro> in both GDB and GDBserver is a different. > > I read through the series and commented where I could. > I don't know enough to comment intelligently on the main patch (#3). > The test suite patch seemed fine to me. Thanks Tom. -- Pedro Alves