Fwd: [PATCH v4 0/4] catch syscall group
Doug Evans
dje@google.com
Tue May 12 21:47:00 GMT 2015
Hi.
The message to the list bounced, but I'm not sure why (this is
text/plain not html).
Apologies for the resend.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
Date: Tue, May 12, 2015 at 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] catch syscall group
To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <gabriel@krisman.be>
Cc: sergiodj@redhat.com, palves@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi writes:
> Thank you both for your review.
>
> This version has the following improvements:
>
> * Apply fixes suggested by Sergio in the testsuite.
> * Use xsltproc to generate the xml files.
>
> Regarding the last change, it allowed me to identify inconsistencies in
> groups for some architectures. The current design makes sure these
> inconsistencies are fixed by centralizing the group information in a
> single file.
>
> Also, this patch series *does not* include the generated files because
> they are too big and can get in the way of code review. Reviewers must
> generate those files by hand by entering the gdb/syscalls directory and
> running the makefile there. Build will fail if reviewer don't do this!
> Once we get this approved, I'll make sure to include the generated files
> in the commit before pushing. Hopefully this will make code review
> easier.
This sounds like something we should key off of --enable-maintainer-mode.
[we *could* use a different option if people are wedded to
--enable-maintainer-mode affecting only autogen files, but
that seems like overkill]
IIRC we don't do that for, e.g., gdbarch.sh -> gdbarch.[ch], but
that's a mistake IMO. Let's get it right here.
It will mean that configuring with --enable-maintainer-mode
will now require xsltproc, but that's the price of going down
this path, let's not hide it.
[maybe that's a good reason to use something other than
--enable-maintainer-mode, but
1) how often do people configure with --enable-maintainer-mode, and
2) maintainers are expected to know and accept these dependencies]
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list