From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 118066 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2016 13:57:36 -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 118054 invoked by uid 89); 14 Jan 2016 13:57:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: usplmg21.ericsson.net Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (HELO usplmg21.ericsson.net) (198.24.6.65) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 13:57:34 +0000 Received: from EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.81]) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 76.9D.32102.D39A7965; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 14:57:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from [142.133.110.95] (147.117.188.8) by smtp-am.internal.ericsson.com (147.117.188.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.248.2; Thu, 14 Jan 2016 08:57:31 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] [ARM] Remove field syscall_next_pc in struct gdbarch_tdep To: Yao Qi References: <1452704004-6821-1-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <5696A385.5090702@ericsson.com> <8660ywv60q.fsf@gmail.com> <56979D96.80602@ericsson.com> <861t9kuviv.fsf@gmail.com> CC: From: Antoine Tremblay Message-ID: <5697A94B.5080002@ericsson.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 13:57:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <861t9kuviv.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-01/txt/msg00297.txt.bz2 On 01/14/2016 08:43 AM, Yao Qi wrote: > Antoine Tremblay writes: > >> Maybe it's only in the email ? but it seems like it's >> >> static CORE_ADDR >> arm_linux_get_next_pcs_syscall_next_pc (struct arm_get_next_pcs *self, >> >> When it should be : >> >> static CORE_ADDR >> arm_linux_get_next_pcs_syscall_next_pc (struct arm_get_next_pcs *self, > > No, it is intended. We don't write declaration at column zero. See > https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/Internals%20GDB-C-Coding-Standards > Right by bad, thanks, Antoine