From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-ports-return-4723-listarch-libc-ports=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 20753 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2014 16:45:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-ports.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-ports-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-ports@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-ports-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 20703 invoked by uid 89); 20 Jan 2014 16:44:59 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:44:59 +0000
Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11])	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0KGiuvb030668	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);	Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:44:56 -0500
Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-85.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.85])	by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s0KGitov021340	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);	Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:44:55 -0500
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: Will Newton <will.newton@linaro.org>
Cc: Marcus Shawcroft <marcus.shawcroft@gmail.com>,        Venkataramanan Kumar <venkataramanan.kumar@linaro.org>,        "libc-ports\@sourceware.org" <libc-ports@sourceware.org>,        Patch Tracking <patch@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [AARCH64]: Pointer mangling support for Aarch64
References: <CAJK_mQ0EoE+_JQvSL+5=C_+Q6JgsV8hvXipy8OgR8+GYyYgt3A@mail.gmail.com>	<87iotxm15i.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<CAJK_mQ2isVSQgbARrRT6KYGODUyCgAavnD-TTYVYK7_bUjb6LQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFqB+Pzt2X9tcqCyzSBn0XcT62c09VUYikUHdNB6iuvrB8poWg@mail.gmail.com>	<87fvozhddn.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<CANu=Dmh7Pvbz0RUXB-hscjhnHOstZ4EwUhUxt7TVYbWvB-y3hQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:45:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <CANu=Dmh7Pvbz0RUXB-hscjhnHOstZ4EwUhUxt7TVYbWvB-y3hQ@mail.gmail.com>	(Will Newton's message of "Mon, 20 Jan 2014 09:00:57 +0000")
Message-ID: <87txcyhabd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00041.txt.bz2

>>>>> "Will" == Will Newton <will.newton@linaro.org> writes:

Will> Can you confirm that gdb does not use the longjmp_target probe? It
Will> doesn't appear to use it as far as I can tell. Are you aware of what
Will> consumers there are for this probe point?

Yeah, gdb uses the "longjmp" probe, not "longjmp_target".
I don't know what uses the latter; though it's worth noting that all
probes are available to gdb and systemtap users, so I wouldn't
necessarily know whether someone is using it.

Tom