From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12281 invoked by alias); 28 Oct 2013 16:44:05 -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 12271 invoked by uid 89); 28 Oct 2013 16:44:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:44:04 +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 r9SGi3ST031322 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:44:03 -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 r9SGi1xj028732; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:44:02 -0400 Message-ID: <526E9451.6050103@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:44:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] add "this" pointers to more target APIs References: <1382464769-2465-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> <1382464769-2465-3-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> <526E8AF2.7050202@redhat.com> <87r4b5cpxd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87r4b5cpxd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00867.txt.bz2 On 10/28/2013 04:37 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > > It is all moot, I think. There is no reason for linux-nat to ever call > linux_nat_is_async_p any more. I think we can drop all the dead code > instead. I noted this in the first submission and said I will do it in > a followup; but I think I'll just tack it on to this series instead. I'd rather keep the code to allow forcing sync mode for a while, to make it easier to debug problems and compare modes. -- Pedro Alves