From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gproxy4-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy4-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.23.142]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21EC5385800E for ; Thu, 26 May 2022 13:59:07 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 21EC5385800E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tromey.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tromey.com Received: from cmgw14.mail.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.0.90.129]) by progateway6.mail.pro1.eigbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57AAE100477EE for ; Thu, 26 May 2022 13:59:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id uE14nvWCShWk0uE14naRVc; Thu, 26 May 2022 13:59:06 +0000 X-Authority-Reason: nr=8 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=IrfbzJzg c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=628f87aa a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:117 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:17 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=oZkIemNP1mAA:10:nop_rcvd_month_year a=Qbun_eYptAEA:10:endurance_base64_authed_username_1 a=CCpqsmhAAAAA:8 a=0yqa4TIauXlhT45a54cA:9 a=ul9cdbp4aOFLsgKbc677:22 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References :Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=qMgLB2FwP5LwVtf+ONY0uGQkD36VOrY3vA+t0MVPoCc=; b=v6KgdyqpWy7xlZCUydQCLg9uR8 O5MAvOrDR2wNAv6zMofES9tsk82mDi4Nb5WOE5ntgSkjWkZ3+6iLflBSLXT/cCu7SW17cE1Y0/X/r XD7giWgy9yxtA20PNoRoJgWhY; Received: from 71-211-158-194.hlrn.qwest.net ([71.211.158.194]:55840 helo=murgatroyd) by box5379.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nuE13-003hTL-LO; Thu, 26 May 2022 07:59:05 -0600 From: Tom Tromey To: Luis Machado via Gdb-patches Cc: Pedro Alves , Luis Machado Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move 64-bit BFD files from ALL_TARGET_OBS to ALL_64_TARGET_OBS References: <20220503111913.563509-1-luis.machado@arm.com> <4099d8e4-54e1-0579-a4f4-15a40d4942a5@arm.com> <715abbd2-18bb-28b5-f30b-6d92ca42e8ca@arm.com> <4a965c5f-0ddf-f6e6-2578-8b45fb526611@arm.com> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 07:59:04 -0600 In-Reply-To: (Luis Machado via Gdb-patches's message of "Thu, 26 May 2022 08:22:09 +0100") Message-ID: <878rqo8kev.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box5379.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - sourceware.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tromey.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 71.211.158.194 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1nuE13-003hTL-LO X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 71-211-158-194.hlrn.qwest.net (murgatroyd) [71.211.158.194]:55840 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 1 X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3023.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 13:59:08 -0000 >>>>> "Luis" == Luis Machado via Gdb-patches writes: Luis> 32-bit builds with --enable-targets=all are still failing due to Luis> the misplacement of these places. Luis> If we drop the tilegx change, would that be acceptable? IIUC, the original objection was that tilegx was listed as 32-bit in opcodes, but was moved to the 64-bit section in your patch. However, tilegx is actually a 64-bit arch, so you sent another patch to correct this in opcodes. If that's all true then I think your patch is correct as-is and should be checked in. Thank you for doing this. Tom