On Fri, 31 Jan 2020, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > This is v3 of my RISC-V/Linux `gdbserver' support proposal. Apologies for the series being broken, there appears to be something here in the e-mail setup that causes `In-Reply-To:' and `References:' headers to be randomly dropped sometimes and I haven't figured out what the exact circumstances are. In any case the changes themselves are: Maciej From gdb-patches-return-163686-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org Fri Jan 31 13:00:45 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 89590 invoked by alias); 31 Jan 2020 13:00:43 -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 Delivered-To: mailing list gdb-patches@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 89076 invoked by uid 89); 31 Jan 2020 13:00:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=submissions, HX-Languages-Length:932, submission, you! X-HELO: esa5.hgst.iphmx.com Received: from esa5.hgst.iphmx.com (HELO esa5.hgst.iphmx.com) (216.71.153.144) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 13:00:24 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=wdc.com; i=@wdc.com; q=dns/txt; s=dkim.wdc.com; t80475623; x12011623; hÚte:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=Om54pjzFHWfnQt86uZTGwyUnjg3EXOCfw3cKQzS4juU=; b=dUxirqlYpu4vuEo1dAc6Gcm3Xmn7792YBu0MOB09BfAFyCNhevsTJ/8l rLkMNgStgjfBN13d1RzLa2ilGxuUzUykAb2YfpZkAJ6gBA5PnRnX+Rxzd IQWuA8FUsaPZsX/jtcNVnjJS+TOwyDdyOjRNWPPm/I9z3zKUwRtYg4XaX 4fn2JFfcN8RPn4VHJNprGwXnTXMH4ryIytgK0lzmgLESjMUNzgTK+/Ohs T76lcJcOep3LsVYD/canoQ/Ue6CyqPrgihsywfkXGCLfOftk/QDJusYbi BqL5zENTV43VWIvUcb7T+PGCJZlYE5McKmvGL1uaZbar3LZmFiXxvd0CY w==; IronPort-SDR: SbKUwVCVqBTpDwr2DpdtofYra20WHkVRXEQIQ9+0fbf/57Ej+7p9mrAH+T+HQ6fighbinyWzbK +YxYDaFhgn43P0AmV0r2YXwSyui7uzjFc4uvSyp5m1Ixey+0moOLkkvcHZWTxmDHl1LyaG8j3+ zB88XCWpwTAbAOQF7pL2XGwBiXYZblfy+euBFB5tK/sOjZ7c02glRmreW8MMBsesHovXqhCYB5 3AO7XmOrWp5EnYEgY4H12U1tl8fCHFSzw79NtRBr3GvGE2hqNag+mF7pgk+G6sMhRUMSFfmToM LOUReceived: from h199-255-45-14.hgst.com (HELO uls-op-cesaep01.wdc.com) ([199.255.45.14]) by ob1.hgst.iphmx.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2020 21:00:22 +0800 IronPort-SDR: YDL0LGGyOZKj2R8V93IpzWbOyczfH+/Kpb8GImF23UOlk+1kX3501ukk7V8eMM2+73txd8Q+2d G28GqNH0rPfaqh0iCNJGTNt0O+p5K7F+byFMxzW4D2bXDPcRWnnmtgo2MRo89qBnUErw/4zx4c 5hae6d1AS5McE1nOAhjnnRrrzDI2b5K8VuKU2BeFy3UbokskJldtlXfFnseyz65g4cvTFvAepo dilrkFYtSMq+UemlYAqPx/bV6lWs8Z7Txx9KvbsheU5R+gN7EPaOB2pFpQt7/bot3T5PxJbh/d toYyI16yKWFy6OquLkgXPN1g Received: from uls-op-cesaip02.wdc.com ([10.248.3.37]) by uls-op-cesaep01.wdc.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Jan 2020 04:53:31 -0800 IronPort-SDR: P84cl/V2DbTA+a4YK138jaH6UP88VylMoYS9OIlLsIQBOR28o77W0jEMb11EGpcduAfNoLCHOb zygA7e86QrK6HN/58mTSolr3CRwEJGU2lj4uTT0IwI1k0JZlTX+1lsaoJWszJChIkoE283zmbX mNrKuofA9o5I/paQnlbQJkymyGtAv57tNLjOMxmbDX96SC3z9NWsf6aWvUpypNSuMtWaHV+5ZM GGM9BW9stIpdWpWbKqkkyvm+lF9olQ0rGHoeodx4owTXZ7es6R4Sl7S2OfZsVrTPjlUnTCjcQ7 D5cWDCIronportException: Internal Received: from unknown (HELO redsun52) ([10.149.66.28]) by uls-op-cesaip02.wdc.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Jan 2020 05:00:22 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 14:23:00 -0000 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org cc: Simon Marchi , Pedro Alves Subject: [PING^9][PATCH v2 0/4] GDB fixes for the remote end having gone astray In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LFD 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2020-01/txt/msg01000.txt.bz2 Content-length: 871 On Wed, 6 Nov 2019, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > As issues from software stepping having gone astray seem to have started > piling up, and with your suggested modifications there is now a dependency > between the changes, I have decided to make this patch submission a small > series with 1/4 and 3/4 corresponding to original individual submissions > and 2/4 and 4/4 being entrely new fixes. Where are we with this series: ? Simon was kind enough (thank you!) to partially review 1-3/4, but I need a final word on these, and also input on 4/4. I will appreciate assistance with moving this forward. Maciej