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 768DD3858D35 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 16:01:12 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 768DD3858D35 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 E1B5510046ED7 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 16:01:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id 8P0pn7jt52s5d8P0pnldHO; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 16:01:11 +0000 X-Authority-Reason: nr=8 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=BOh2EHcG c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=61e19e47 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:117 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:17 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=DghFqjY3_ZEA:10:nop_rcvd_month_year a=Qbun_eYptAEA:10:endurance_base64_authed_username_1 a=CCpqsmhAAAAA:8 a=6zthhUBZUFV38G3fFSYA: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=8DbrWb8n2VIlJ1b0WRVsvwEoVLPbwlHHwV7DbtGQr9w=; b=tUHAkGqD3DhQK5K/ZuxBDYH2by OiZiobuiY5ftnQEJVg2MtywBVHTvCt8j1TRH7z11VfHwPh++cZYhhanTgPXll4n4ehIYuBWSr4pFv 8ez3LGO9+E8gTYNevjMgV5E1N; Received: from 75-166-134-30.hlrn.qwest.net ([75.166.134.30]:55860 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 1n8P0o-000YuA-Q4; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:01:10 -0700 From: Tom Tromey To: Tankut Baris Aktemur via Gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] gdb/cli: add a 'normal_stop' option to 'cli_suppress_notification' References: <9195fd2511991fdd17cccc11e839dd0885c2f530.1638370938.git.tankut.baris.aktemur@intel.com> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:01:09 -0700 In-Reply-To: <9195fd2511991fdd17cccc11e839dd0885c2f530.1638370938.git.tankut.baris.aktemur@intel.com> (Tankut Baris Aktemur via Gdb-patches's message of "Wed, 1 Dec 2021 16:08:28 +0100") Message-ID: <87wnj2i9x6.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: 75.166.134.30 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1n8P0o-000YuA-Q4 X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 75-166-134-30.hlrn.qwest.net (murgatroyd) [75.166.134.30]:55860 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 1 X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3025.4 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 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) 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: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 16:01:17 -0000 >>>>> ">" == Tankut Baris Aktemur via Gdb-patches writes: >> Extend the 'cli_suppress_notification' struct with a new field, >> 'normal_stop', that can be used for checking if printing normal stop >> events on the CLI should be suppressed. >> This patch only introduces the flag. The subsequent patch adds a user >> command to turn the flag off/on. Thanks. This is ok, though I think it shouldn't land until the subsequent patch is also approved. Tom