From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17046 invoked by alias); 17 Dec 2019 19:32:32 -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 17038 invoked by uid 89); 17 Dec 2019 19:32:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=HX-Languages-Length:1017 X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 19:32:30 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id xBHJWL4j013077 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:32:26 -0500 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca xBHJWL4j013077 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=polymtl.ca; s=default; t=1576611146; bh=4rpp+NsEJiwhTK4KSypdk+/CWsr4Vrf46l9FE+kMDQc=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Sh0ys2WRaNXkpI4wkXqAobv8gQ/9kV4ScKqxWi7YSloy06H2i1WeFgiHDetwKOlwF wIXE1z9sQeO/0y0FFR1pEkOETJZoSA0hBgJGgbTZagkWfNDd/AImYx89Ug5Or1XoA7 2tQHwrm9K0oEi9abot/n+QIY7Ok+Cfp9Nd1HYKEY= Received: from [172.16.0.95] (192-222-181-218.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.181.218]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C97491E05A; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:32:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Fix and cleanups in jit.c To: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20191216033917.2936248-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <9deeca6f-f280-c8bc-f09b-ba422a91f016@redhat.com> <154891dd-26d5-5844-09c4-00643b2f37b5@polymtl.ca> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: <7c4c44d7-14e5-b843-2b80-21bce122dbd2@polymtl.ca> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 19:32:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-12/txt/msg00752.txt.bz2 On 2019-12-17 2:10 p.m., Pedro Alves wrote: > On 12/16/19 11:19 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: >> On 2019-12-16 2:27 p.m., Pedro Alves wrote: >>> On 12/16/19 3:39 AM, Simon Marchi wrote: >>>> This is a follow-up to: >>>> >>>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg00568.html >>>> >>>> Again, the first patch is a fix and the rest is some c++ification. >>>> >>>> I think I fixed all review comments from v1, the biggest change being >>>> the use of std::forward_list instead of std::vector. >>> >>> Thanks, LGTM. >>> >>> Pedro Alves >> >> Thanks, I pushed the series. Do you think I should push patch 1/5 >> to the stable branch? It's not a new bug introduced in the last cycle, >> it's been there forever, so I'm not sure what we usually do in these >> cases. > Sure, that's fine with me. Generally it's fine to backport bugfixes > that are supposedly safe, and not invasive, such as this one. Ok, thanks, I pushed just that patch to the gdb-9-branch branch. Simon