From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933185AbXCHTef (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:34:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933215AbXCHTef (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:34:35 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao103.cox.net ([68.230.241.43]:42551 "EHLO fed1rmmtao103.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933193AbXCHTeb (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:34:31 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 2689 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2007 14:34:31 EST Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 11:49:41 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Andi Kleen Cc: Dave Jiang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64 RESTORE_CONTEXT missing '\n' Message-ID: <20070308184940.GP11626@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20070307204516.GA24095@blade.az.mvista.com> <200703081814.53153.ak@suse.de> <45F04B6E.9000703@mvista.com> <200703081937.56167.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200703081937.56167.ak@suse.de> Organization: Embedded Alley Solutions, Inc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 07:37:56PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Thursday 08 March 2007 18:44, Dave Jiang wrote: > > > In spite of kgdb, shouldn't it have that \n anyways in case some other code > > gets added in the future after the macro? Or are you saying that there should > > never be any code ever after that macro? > > Sure if there is mainline code added after that macro we add the \n. > But only if it makes sense to add code there, which it didn't in kgdb. Was that because with recent enough tools and config options there was enough annotations so GDB could finally figure out where things had stopped? Thanks. -- Tom Rini