From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19011 invoked by alias); 4 Mar 2019 20:00:53 -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 18869 invoked by uid 89); 4 Mar 2019 20:00:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mail-vk1-f177.google.com Received: from mail-vk1-f177.google.com (HELO mail-vk1-f177.google.com) (209.85.221.177) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 04 Mar 2019 20:00:37 +0000 Received: by mail-vk1-f177.google.com with SMTP id k64so1418982vke.1 for ; Mon, 04 Mar 2019 12:00:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sifive.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9CxVOy7s98zsAGeNhhFfQcTzXzFLROXt0VUeWrUzyPM=; b=Y3KciDxcboNWCX4dGTm42h31TDm5v0Io9JAMKBKJaFhMa1+d8FS5UEF5TW+7aG+Zcs R7OEf1kUtTBfKg10JiBfA8uludE2IB/69/zO4l3xuPZhZ4cUgvGEGHD5lZ6a9znaKFp0 /glQBi7cBqrvAuzWQYNAqEYy5wVbpmOW/aOQ+c7j3mUFGu2R5Cat3Yfuurl3v6Mvtd6L vMdDxOv3ynjEkl+0TCw9bG7o6JHQOdSKgRno5IHTSXBiAbbZFfXFTLMBlVDwFZffs7n3 BKD5Fe96iXF5bQGvS3MTox8U13NrKLa/HnLJ3B9hKK0yW0iuL9hQZGC2Ca4P3bQCURY8 JfTQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190227055112.4A5E782D7B@joel.gnat.com> <332e186f-0c04-ab6d-754e-bf14d2981923@sifive.com> <20190304111454.GV10887@embecosm.com> In-Reply-To: <20190304111454.GV10887@embecosm.com> From: Jim Wilson Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 20:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: GDB 8.2.90 available for testing To: Andrew Burgess Cc: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-SW-Source: 2019-03/txt/msg00042.txt.bz2 On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 3:14 AM Andrew Burgess wrote: > I don't think these are regressions, just new tests that expose a bug > that was present since the initial upstreaming. OK. New tests failing is not a problem. I just wanted to make sure something didn't break in the RISC-V target dependent support. Jim