From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25304 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2015 16:43:12 -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 25273 invoked by uid 89); 22 Jan 2015 16:43:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 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; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 16:43:08 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t0MGh5nC020482 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:43:05 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-51.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.51]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t0MGh1er030537 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:43:04 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 16:43:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: Doug Evans , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [patchv2] Sort threads for thread apply all (bt) Message-ID: <20150122164301.GA11240@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20150115183316.GA16405@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20150116233802.GA8732@host2.jankratochvil.net> <21696.17350.451535.337528@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> <54C0DC83.20401@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54C0DC83.20401@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-01/txt/msg00597.txt.bz2 On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:18:27 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > With http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16445 in > mind, should we add a counterpart option to explicitly force > descending order at the same time, so we're a bit more free > to change the default order at some point? Isn't the PR # a typo? I do not see how 16445 could be related. Jan