From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id hEy3FC4QcGI12gMAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 02 May 2022 13:09:02 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 42B081E058; Mon, 2 May 2022 13:09:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE44B1E00D for ; Mon, 2 May 2022 13:09:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80759385741A for ; Mon, 2 May 2022 17:09:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail-wm1-f43.google.com (mail-wm1-f43.google.com [209.85.128.43]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FB2E3858C50 for ; Mon, 2 May 2022 17:08:46 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 5FB2E3858C50 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=palves.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-wm1-f43.google.com with SMTP id m2-20020a1ca302000000b003943bc63f98so1683050wme.4 for ; Mon, 02 May 2022 10:08:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=KDH63axMvWLtfrJNALebs7/26OnHuw2PoZ2DQADIiSg=; b=2z4Sb4tXnEN4dHoGLGrlyIB0a95W/rkFWsRJL1D5SVnvm06mGKKEYE2HHtkB1Xt8RJ /Xq9mF6iPJe5SZBU4VQefr0oWp1MZEaQckqUMFvFK5TuxoFI19BVICPXFnPuc57B6RzP 47fstp5Hkv9KdTBeQLMObNhYls6sCLGbFk0ispFoLm0iClZoh2d3AGnBJA0017VV4y+8 k5t5Rzm530u1frB4a6e15y1YUcicPUfWrvre76+esYNdHKAMwttD9tNDjIj48GnrLLDX hN4rA5RgJcr8lft4vZFEmU7iUV3D8oQ8ah1/LNnkFQwXcNu6n4AAh0hfmHhqLGrndr8l Kj2A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530UYNJMnury4vY3OL0QVsJ/xlfY2EOwIRJE0ec1Eb7YFtl8ik+i BIeQkcrbtoFubx48TP+oLk9AqFc/9A1mmQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwjlsqc8X3svwIZmrON+iRrM3gnJdc6WXr7tzE8OUzdClMyjOdgyAAdyAHxoorXleJ54/zU0A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4ed3:b0:394:20e7:bb86 with SMTP id g19-20020a05600c4ed300b0039420e7bb86mr66366wmq.169.1651511325264; Mon, 02 May 2022 10:08:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2001:8a0:f924:2600:209d:85e2:409e:8726? ([2001:8a0:f924:2600:209d:85e2:409e:8726]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o30-20020adfa11e000000b0020c5253d8cbsm7460991wro.23.2022.05.02.10.08.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 May 2022 10:08:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 18:08:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] get page size using sysconf (_SC_PAGESIZE) instead of PAGE_SIZE Content-Language: en-US To: Tom Tromey References: <20220430121623.42196-1-zied.guermazi@trande.de> <20220430121623.42196-2-zied.guermazi@trande.de> <87sfprkhy6.fsf@tromey.com> <6e8148d5-bba1-86e2-313c-b9e99042874c@palves.net> <87sfpr50j2.fsf@tromey.com> From: Pedro Alves In-Reply-To: <87sfpr50j2.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: , Cc: Zied Guermazi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 2022-05-02 18:04, Tom Tromey wrote: > Pedro> Please don't merge it yet. Andreas' question is quite pertinent > Pedro> -- this file in only built on x86 hosts. The premise of the > Pedro> patch doesn't seems strange offhand. Is the Aarch64 port going > Pedro> to start using linux-btrace.c? That isn't clear. > > Based on the thread I assumed it was in preparation for such a merge. > > I suppose I don't really know for sure, but on the other hand it also > seemed like this wasn't harmful. Yeah, I agree it doesn't seem harmful. I'd just like to clarify the motivation, and make sure we have the right info in the commit log.