Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Nick Bull]

Hi all,

Is it possible to get this Python events patch in under the wire?

http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00505.html

It's been through a couple of rounds of review and has no outstanding
issues that I know of.

Thanks

Nick

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Joel Brobecker]

> Is it possible to get this Python events patch in under the wire?
> 
> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00505.html
> 
> It's been through a couple of rounds of review and has no outstanding
> issues that I know of.

I'd love to get this one in 7.7, but at the same time, it's hard
justifying delaying a branch for a non-critical failure.

The good news is that there is little to no activity at the moment,
so there is no point in me creating the branch now. Creating it
after New Year will prevent the need for updating the year ranges
in the copyright headers twice. And that will give you more time
to get the patch in.

I took a quick look at your patch; one of the trivial things I noticed
is that many new functions and new types are missing documentation.
If you add those and resend a patch, that'll have the nice property
if implicitly pinging the maintainers. Also, feel free to ping on
your patch a week or two after submission, and every week thereafter.

-- 
Joel

GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Joel Brobecker]

Hello,

I think the last known issue on the TODO list before branching
(see TODO at https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.7_Release)
should be checked in today, or this weekend at the latest.

Unless there are some other issues we haven't listed yet, I propose
to create the branch on Monday morning.

Cheers,
-- 
Joel

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[H.J. Lu]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I think the last known issue on the TODO list before branching
> (see TODO at https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.7_Release)
> should be checked in today, or this weekend at the latest.
>
> Unless there are some other issues we haven't listed yet, I propose
> to create the branch on Monday morning.
>

I have 4 patches I like to see in GDB 7.7:

https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00309.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00307.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00313.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00310.html

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Joel Brobecker]

> I have 4 patches I like to see in GDB 7.7:
> 
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00309.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00307.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00313.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00310.html

I'll need a little more from you.  What's your estimate for getting them
in, and what are the consequences of not having them for 7.7?

Here is what I propose: We go ahead with the branch on Monday.
Looking at the patches, they seem to be relatively simple enough
that they should be good candidates for backporting to the branch
if they get approved after Monday.

-- 
Joel

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[H.J. Lu]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
>> I have 4 patches I like to see in GDB 7.7:
>>
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00309.html
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00307.html
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00313.html
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00310.html
>
> I'll need a little more from you.  What's your estimate for getting them

As you said, they are small changes.  But I don't know when
Mark will have time to review them.

> in, and what are the consequences of not having them for 7.7?

Reverse debugging won't work for x32 without them.

> Here is what I propose: We go ahead with the branch on Monday.
> Looking at the patches, they seem to be relatively simple enough
> that they should be good candidates for backporting to the branch
> if they get approved after Monday.
>

It sounds good to me.

BTW, what can/should GDB community do to reduce review time
for x86 specific changes, especially those small changes.

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Mark Kettenis]

> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:06:36 -0800
> From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
> 
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I think the last known issue on the TODO list before branching
> > (see TODO at https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.7_Release)
> > should be checked in today, or this weekend at the latest.
> >
> > Unless there are some other issues we haven't listed yet, I propose
> > to create the branch on Monday morning.
> >
> 
> I have 4 patches I like to see in GDB 7.7:
> 
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00313.html

This one is defenitely ok; thanks for revising it.

The other three look reasonable, but I'm really not familliar enough
with the instruction set to review these diffs.  And I don't use that
code myself.  So you should probably just go ahead.

Cheers,

Mark

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[H.J. Lu]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:06:36 -0800
>> From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I think the last known issue on the TODO list before branching
>> > (see TODO at https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.7_Release)
>> > should be checked in today, or this weekend at the latest.
>> >
>> > Unless there are some other issues we haven't listed yet, I propose
>> > to create the branch on Monday morning.
>> >
>>
>> I have 4 patches I like to see in GDB 7.7:
>>
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00313.html
>
> This one is defenitely ok; thanks for revising it.
>
> The other three look reasonable, but I'm really not familliar enough
> with the instruction set to review these diffs.  And I don't use that
> code myself.  So you should probably just go ahead.
>

I checked 4 patches in.  Thanks for reviewing them.

-- 
H.J.

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Sergio Durigan Junior]

On Thursday, December 19 2013, Joel Brobecker wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I think the last known issue on the TODO list before branching
> (see TODO at https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.7_Release)
> should be checked in today, or this weekend at the latest.
>
> Unless there are some other issues we haven't listed yet, I propose
> to create the branch on Monday morning.

Hi Joel,

First of all, thanks for this :-).

Now, I am sorry for not having updated the wiki!  I would really like to
see the SystemTap SDT probe support for AArch64 in.  It is a simple
patch, has been pre-reviewed before, but I had to do other improvements
on the general SDT API before submitting it again.

The new API has been approved in:

<https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00660.html>

I was waiting for Mark Kettenis' comments on it, but I decided to check
the patch in today and proceed with the AArch64 submission.

Now, what do you want me to do?  Maybe update the wiki?  I hope that the
AArch64 patch will be approved very quickly, so maybe I'll even be able
to push it this weekend.

Thanks,

-- 
Sergio

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Joel Brobecker]

> Now, I am sorry for not having updated the wiki!  I would really like to
> see the SystemTap SDT probe support for AArch64 in.  It is a simple
> patch, has been pre-reviewed before, but I had to do other improvements
> on the general SDT API before submitting it again.

No, thank you for letting me know. This answer is the reason why
it's important for me to send these "heads up" messages.

> The new API has been approved in:
> 
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00660.html>
> 
> I was waiting for Mark Kettenis' comments on it, but I decided to check
> the patch in today and proceed with the AArch64 submission.
> 
> Now, what do you want me to do?  Maybe update the wiki?  I hope that the
> AArch64 patch will be approved very quickly, so maybe I'll even be able
> to push it this weekend.

I will venture a guess that you'll be able to get this one push
by Monday, but even if you don't, I think it'll be sufficiently
contained that we can backport it to the branch.

In the meantime, let's add the patch to the wiki, if only for
posterity :).

-- 
Joel

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Sergio Durigan Junior]

On Friday, December 20 2013, Joel Brobecker wrote:

>> Now, I am sorry for not having updated the wiki!  I would really like to
>> see the SystemTap SDT probe support for AArch64 in.  It is a simple
>> patch, has been pre-reviewed before, but I had to do other improvements
>> on the general SDT API before submitting it again.
>
> No, thank you for letting me know. This answer is the reason why
> it's important for me to send these "heads up" messages.

Thanks a lot for that, again!

>> The new API has been approved in:
>> 
>> <https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00660.html>
>> 
>> I was waiting for Mark Kettenis' comments on it, but I decided to check
>> the patch in today and proceed with the AArch64 submission.
>> 
>> Now, what do you want me to do?  Maybe update the wiki?  I hope that the
>> AArch64 patch will be approved very quickly, so maybe I'll even be able
>> to push it this weekend.
>
> I will venture a guess that you'll be able to get this one push
> by Monday, but even if you don't, I think it'll be sufficiently
> contained that we can backport it to the branch.

Yeah, nice, I believe things will be covered until Monday, indeed.

> In the meantime, let's add the patch to the wiki, if only for
> posterity :).

Great, I've added an entry below the Todo: section.

Thanks!

-- 
Sergio

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Sergio Durigan Junior]

On Friday, December 20 2013, Joel Brobecker wrote:

>> Now, what do you want me to do?  Maybe update the wiki?  I hope that the
>> AArch64 patch will be approved very quickly, so maybe I'll even be able
>> to push it this weekend.
>
> I will venture a guess that you'll be able to get this one push
> by Monday, but even if you don't, I think it'll be sufficiently
> contained that we can backport it to the branch.

Hey Joel,

Just a heads-up: the AArch64 patch has been submitted and pre-reviewed
by Yufeng Zhang and Marcus Shawcroft (both from ARM), but I still need a
maintainer's approval to check it in.

I'm not sure I'll get one until next year, when everybody comes back
from the holidays.  I saw you're delaying the branch creation until next
week, so let's see what we can do :-).  As the last option, as you said,
I can always backport the patch.

Thanks a lot,

-- 
Sergio

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Joel Brobecker]

> Just a heads-up: the AArch64 patch has been submitted and pre-reviewed
> by Yufeng Zhang and Marcus Shawcroft (both from ARM), but I still need a
> maintainer's approval to check it in.

That is really helpful, as we now know that the CPU-specific bits
should be correct. I will take a look at the trivial bits, now.

-- 
Joel

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Joel Brobecker]

> I think the last known issue on the TODO list before branching
> (see TODO at https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.7_Release)
> should be checked in today, or this weekend at the latest.
> 
> Unless there are some other issues we haven't listed yet, I propose
> to create the branch on Monday morning.

We still have 2 outstanding patches that I know of, one being
discussed (PR 16201: internal error on a cygwin program linked against a
DLL with no .data section), and one that shouldn't be a problem
being reviewed (Fix PR tdep/15653: Implement SystemTap SDT probe support
for AArch64).

I'll wait another day or two to allow those to go in. If that
does not work out, I'll go ahead and create the branch. I'll
hold the first pre-release and wait until those two are backported.

-- 
Joel

Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Joel Brobecker]

Today's update:

> We still have 2 outstanding patches that I know of, one being
> discussed (PR 16201: internal error on a cygwin program linked against a
> DLL with no .data section), and one that shouldn't be a problem
> being reviewed (Fix PR tdep/15653: Implement SystemTap SDT probe support
> for AArch64).
> 
> I'll wait another day or two to allow those to go in. If that
> does not work out, I'll go ahead and create the branch. I'll
> hold the first pre-release and wait until those two are backported.

We're down to 1 patch, recently reviewed, and waiting for an update.
I think that, no matter what happens, I will create the branch tomorrow.
If the patch for Windows makes it, I will create the first pre-release.
Otherwise, I'll wait for that patch to be backported, and then create
the pre-release.

-- 
Joel

RE: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?

[Pierre Muller]

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Joel Brobecker
> Envoyé : mardi 7 janvier 2014 03:55
> À : gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Objet : Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday?
> 
> Today's update:
> 
> > We still have 2 outstanding patches that I know of, one being
> > discussed (PR 16201: internal error on a cygwin program linked
> against a
> > DLL with no .data section), and one that shouldn't be a problem
> > being reviewed (Fix PR tdep/15653: Implement SystemTap SDT probe
> support
> > for AArch64).
> >
> > I'll wait another day or two to allow those to go in. If that
> > does not work out, I'll go ahead and create the branch. I'll
> > hold the first pre-release and wait until those two are backported.
> 
> We're down to 1 patch, recently reviewed, and waiting for an update.
> I think that, no matter what happens, I will create the branch
> tomorrow.
> If the patch for Windows makes it, I will create the first pre-release.
> Otherwise, I'll wait for that patch to be backported, and then create
> the pre-release.
Joel,
  as I did check the windows patch in, I updated the 7.7 Wiki page,
and you can create a pre-release!

  Thanks for all!

Pierre