From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-91865-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 115794 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2018 07:27:19 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 16026 invoked by uid 89); 26 Apr 2018 07:26:00 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: smtp2200-217.mail.aliyun.com
X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=CONTINUE;BC=0.112677|-1;CH=green;FP=0|0|0|0|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e02c03291;MF=han_mao@c-sky.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=4;RT=4;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---.BqYCJ0X_1524727538;
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 07:27:00 -0000
From: Mao Han <han_mao@c-sky.com>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: c-sky_gcc_upstream@c-sky.com, gnu-csky@mentor.com,
	libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 01/10] C-SKY: ABI related code
Message-ID: <20180426072536.GA15099@vmh-VirtualBox>
References: <cover.1523169833.git.han_mao@c-sky.com>
 <a48f0cf3f6152e5bc310484fb9595586a13e6a92.1523169833.git.han_mao@c-sky.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1804172051090.1402@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1804172051090.1402@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
X-SW-Source: 2018-04/txt/msg00560.txt.bz2

Hi,
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 08:52:50PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Apr 2018, Mao Han wrote:
> 
> >         * sysdeps/csky/backtrace.c: New file
> 
> Please explain why this file is needed rather than the generic 
> debug/backtrace.c being sufficient.  (To the extent that some 
> architectures do benefit from having their own variants on the generic 
> version, we should try to work out how to refactor things to reduce 
> duplication.)
>
Seems no need to add the new file. I'll using the generic version.

Best Regards,
Mao Han