From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 51487 invoked by alias); 23 Mar 2018 10:13:41 -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 51057 invoked by uid 89); 23 Mar 2018 10:13:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=perfect 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; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:13:40 +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 C197240201A6; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:13:38 +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 4E3A62023231; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:13:38 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gdb: Fix testsuite issue in gdb.arch/amd64-disp-step-avx.exp To: Andrew Burgess , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <963bfa7c7483c4c907f4a63e9588b243845c8acd.1521722330.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> <0a12132f-5423-4319-02da-4c61d072f237@redhat.com> <20180322230136.GB13407@embecosm.com> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <1bc7b09b-6ffe-d008-1973-ecc09aae849f@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:13:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180322230136.GB13407@embecosm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-03/txt/msg00442.txt.bz2 On 03/22/2018 11:01 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote: > Thanks for the review. > > I've updated the patch inline with your feedback, the comment has > been expanded to better match what we actually do, and we now confirm > that xmm1 -> xmm15 are still 0 after the test instruction. > > Checked on x86-64 GNU/Linux and buildbot. Perfect, OK. Thanks, Pedro Alves