From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19539 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2012 20:48:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 19526 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Sep 2012 20:48:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:48:05 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q8PKm5x5013368 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:48:05 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q8PKm4tk012587 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:48:04 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Siddhesh Poyarekar Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Expand size of LEN parameter for invalidate_bp_value_on_memory_change References: <20120925193119.2cd0dd75@spoyarek> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:48:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20120925193119.2cd0dd75@spoyarek> (Siddhesh Poyarekar's message of "Tue, 25 Sep 2012 19:31:19 +0530") Message-ID: <87bogt25iz.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-09/txt/msg00562.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Siddhesh" == Siddhesh Poyarekar writes: Siddhesh> Attached patch expands the LEN parameter of Siddhesh> invalidate_bp_value_on_memory_change to ssize_t to reflect the Siddhesh> LEN that is actually sent by write_memory_with_notification. Siddhesh> I have updated observer.texi accordingly so that the observer Siddhesh> function signatures are correct (as well as the generated Siddhesh> documentation). No regressions resulting from this change on Siddhesh> x86_64. OK to commit? Ok. Thanks for doing this. Tom