From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13118 invoked by alias); 11 Apr 2014 20:33:24 -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 13107 invoked by uid 89); 11 Apr 2014 20:33:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 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; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:33:22 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s3BKXIYj029164 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:33:19 -0400 Received: from valrhona.uglyboxes.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s3BKXHve012487 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:33:18 -0400 Message-ID: <5348518D.8010100@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:33:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: "Agovic, Sanimir" , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/15] Please have a final look References: <1397133617-26681-1-git-send-email-sanimir.agovic@intel.com> <20140410143915.GD15965@adacore.com> <0377C58828D86C4588AEEC42FC3B85A71D84FE7A@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com> <53483E24.5060302@redhat.com> <20140411202747.GN4250@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20140411202747.GN4250@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg00222.txt.bz2 On 04/11/2014 01:27 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >>> Thank you Joel for helping me out through the patch series! I just >>> committed the patches including the final adjustments. >> >> Unfortunatley, this patchset has regressed the following tests: > > Argh! Sorry about that, and thanks for the heads up, Keith. > Not a problem -- I was just about to commit some patches -- one of which touches some bits of this patch set and noticed that a clean update/test had a few more FAILs than I expected. [We all keep a mental count of the "normal" number of FAILs on our systems, right? ;-)] > I'm doing a quick round of testing with what's left of my day today, > but we might have to revert the patch series to allow us more time > to investigate. Would you like me to hold off on committing my c++/16675 patchset? That touches eval.c:evaluate_subexp_for_sizeof. It's not a huge deal IMO. A Most of the "conflict" is simply that I chose to refactor this function a little. [i.e., remove all the "return value_from_longest" and collect them at the end of the function] > How come this didn't show up in Sanimir's testing? I don't know. Maybe my sandbox is messed up? It *is* Friday afterall! :-) Keith