From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23071 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2014 17:13:16 -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 23033 invoked by uid 89); 18 Mar 2014 17:13:16 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mtaout23.012.net.il Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:12:46 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N2N00C006D19V00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:12:42 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N2N00CH86H58H20@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:12:42 +0200 (IST) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:13:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix "PC register is not available" issue In-reply-to: <20140318165413.GE4282@adacore.com> To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83k3bra0rx.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83txawa9wk.fsf@gnu.org> <20140318161608.GD4282@adacore.com> <83pplja2h9.fsf@gnu.org> <20140318165413.GE4282@adacore.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-03/txt/msg00422.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:54:13 -0700 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > Another thought I had on your patch is that we might want to limit > > > the warning to situation where the return code is not a permission > > > denied. > > > > I'm not sure we should bother. After all, if the problem is real, we > > will get an error further down the line, when we use the handle to > > that thread to do something with it. > > > > IOW, I see no need to thrash the entire session because of something > > that isn't fatal. > > I didn't mean to change the behavior - only hide the warning. Ah, OK. I think I'll do that in the next version of the patch. > I think the only part we need to look at before putting your patch > in is analyzing its side-effects. I'll look into that and post the results. Thanks.