From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4226D39874D1 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 15:51:54 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 4226D39874D1 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [172.16.0.95] (192-222-181-218.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.181.218]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B5F521E5F9; Wed, 27 May 2020 11:51:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/42] Share DWARF partial symtabs between objfiles To: Pedro Alves , Simon Marchi , Tom Tromey , Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches References: <20200512210913.5593-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <875zcn1xwp.fsf@tromey.com> <5032927f-877b-100b-c3a7-55c78d3a7d7a@redhat.com> <058f6a56-4690-cfd8-ede4-a9bbafc85e1a@efficios.com> <28656eeb-c0b3-c601-f05c-14cfe5493a7e@redhat.com> <63f4d428-b0ec-26de-0265-31002b61f4dd@simark.ca> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 11:51:53 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: tl Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 15:51:55 -0000 On 2020-05-27 10:53 a.m., Simon Marchi wrote: > I added another patch to the series, see here: > > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-May/169065.html > > The gdb.base/infcall-nested-structs-c.exp / gdb.base/infcall-nested-structs-c++.exp failures > just appeared to be intermittent failures in the end. So I think that with this last patch, > the series would be good to go. > > Simon > All right, the series is now pushed! With such a change, I do expect some things to break, please let me know if you see some unexpected behavior chgange following this. Simon