Re: GDB 13 release -- 2022-10-01 update

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>]

> > > > I would like to land 2 patches for Cortex-M before the release.
> > > > 
> > > > * https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28549
> > > 
> > > Can you provide more information about this one?
> > > 
> > >    - What's the motivation behind suggesting this PR? This will be
> > >      important for us to know should resolution of this PR be delayed.
> > 
> > The motivation is simply that with the last improvements on the stack unwind
> > on Cortex-M, the stack unwind can take a considerable amount of time
> > (endless?) if the CPU is in lockup state.
> > 
> > >    - Have the latest version of the patches been submitted for review?
> > >      If yes, can you provide URLs? In reading the PR, I am not really
> > >      sure how many patches we are talking about, and where those patches
> > >      migth be residing.
> > 
> > I think Luis has the most up to date status here. Thomaz has created a
> > single patch (https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13853) that
> > would handle the problematic case, but as there is no copyright on file for
> > Tomaz, he needed to send one to FSF. A few weeks back, Thomaz did just that,
> > but there has been no response from FSF.
> > The patch is in a sort-of-working state. There are some minor things to be
> > addressed, but before the patch can be shared on the ML, the copyright pat
> > must be handled.
> 
> OK; let's see what happens with the FSF assignment process.

Good news; I just received confirmation that the process is complete :-).

> It seems indeed desirable for us to include it in GDB 13, but I don't
> think it will be blocking us if the patch gets delayed because
> we're waiting for the assignment to come through (looking at progress
> on the other issues, I think the FSF still has time). Worst case
> scenario, if everything but this patch is done, we can start by
> branching and creating our first pre-release. I think it'll be
> relatively easy and safe to backport once the patch is approved.
> 
> Just for the avoidance of doubt, I assume you guys are finalizing
> the patch in parallel to waiting for the FSF to get back to us,
> right? Ideally, as soon as we have the paperwork done, the patch
> gets pushed.

-- 
Joel