From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 43676 invoked by alias); 12 Sep 2016 04:22:13 -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 43653 invoked by uid 89); 12 Sep 2016 04:22:12 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,TRACKER_ID autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:864, Checked 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, 12 Sep 2016 04:22:02 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D51C17F08B for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 04:22:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unused-10-15-17-193.yyz.redhat.com [10.15.17.193]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u8C4M0GM007182 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:22:00 -0400 From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [testsuite patch] Fix false FAIL in stap-probe.exp References: <20160911140413.GA557@host1.jankratochvil.net> <87inu2miwi.fsf@redhat.com> <20160911175615.GA3517@host1.jankratochvil.net> <87a8fem9x4.fsf@redhat.com> <20160911211530.GA23345@host1.jankratochvil.net> X-URL: http://blog.sergiodj.net Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 04:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20160911211530.GA23345@host1.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Sun, 11 Sep 2016 23:15:30 +0200") Message-ID: <8737l5n3x3.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-09/txt/msg00088.txt.bz2 On Sunday, September 11 2016, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:57:43 +0200, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: >> No if we mark it as volatile and use it as the argument for one of the >> probes. > > I did not realize the two probe instances can have different parameters and > they still will become a multi-location probe. Yeah, the probe name is what matters for the location. >> What do you think of the patch below? > > I find it fine/better than the patch of mine. I do not see relevance of my > name on your patch but I do not mind either way. Thanks. Checked in with your name in it, because you found the bug. 2c29df25b7c2ff006b45afd80ee6dd734ebbd47c -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/