From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 102814 invoked by alias); 13 Aug 2018 16:30:40 -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 102589 invoked by uid 89); 13 Aug 2018 16:30:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=conversation, replies X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:30:21 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 102C587A78; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:30:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 422162026D66; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/12] [PowerPC] Add support for PPR and DSCR To: Pedro Franco de Carvalho , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20180810025210.6942-1-pedromfc@linux.ibm.com> <20180810025210.6942-9-pedromfc@linux.ibm.com> <8181ddeb-6e12-69ce-f469-56fd9a939760@redhat.com> <87a7puhtl1.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: uweigand@de.ibm.com, edjunior@gmail.com From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:30:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87a7puhtl1.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-08/txt/msg00332.txt.bz2 On 08/10/2018 09:09 PM, Pedro Franco de Carvalho wrote: > Pedro Alves writes: > >> Skimming the patch I noticed the duplicated test names/messages >> above. Take a look here: >> >> https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDBTestcaseCookbook#Make_sure_test_messages_are_unique >> >> Here I'd use with_test_prefix, something like: >> >> with_test_prefix "something relevant" { >> gdb_test "info reg dscr" "dscr.*0x0*20\[ \t\]+.*" >> gdb_test "info reg ppr" "ppr.*0x0*8000000000000\[ \t\]+.*" >> } >> >> gdb_test "stepi" "asm.*" >> >> with_test_prefix "something else" { >> gdb_test "info reg dscr" "dscr.*0x0*20\[ \t\]+.*" >> gdb_test "info reg ppr" "ppr.*0x0*8000000000000\[ \t\]+.*" >> } > > I'll update all the tests. Should I send these in a V3, or as replies to > each patch in this thread? I usually send a new patch as reply if it's the changes don't affect the other patches in the series. I.e., if it's not likely to cause confusion to readers, and is more likely to help readers that way for keeping the conversation threaded. Otherwise, if you're going to update a larger set of patches, or if an update to a patch affects other patches in the series, tend replying to patches with updates is likely to make it harder to understand and track which pieces go together and thus sending a new series starting with a clean slate is preferred IMO and is trivial if you use git send-email. > >> BTW, isn't the series NEWS-worthy? > > I'll add an item there. Thanks, Pedro Alves