From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21924 invoked by alias); 24 May 2016 16:27:26 -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 20696 invoked by uid 89); 24 May 2016 16:27:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 24 May 2016 16:27:23 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4EB3201E9; Tue, 24 May 2016 16:27:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u4OGRLeW016431; Tue, 24 May 2016 12:27:22 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] Refactor clone_all_breakpoints To: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1463757161-25850-1-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <1463757161-25850-6-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 16:27:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1463757161-25850-6-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg00430.txt.bz2 On 05/20/2016 04:12 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > This patch is to change the interface of clone_all_breakpoints, from > lists of breakpoints and raw_breakpoints to child thread and parent > process. I choose child thread to pass because we need the ptid of > the child thread in the following patch. Seems fine to me. I'd have passed the parent thread instead of process. Thanks, Pedro Alves