On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 4:18 PM Tao Liu <ltao(a)redhat.com
<mailto:ltao@redhat.com>> wrote:
Hi Stephen,
On Sat, Apr 5, 2025 at 12:30 PM Stephen Brennan
<stephen.s.brennan(a)oracle.com <mailto:stephen.s.brennan@oracle.com>>
wrote:
>
> Hi Tao,
>
> Thanks for digging through the code with me. I'm not very confident or
> familiar with it, so I don't have 100% confident answers, but I'll
do my
> best to answer:
Thanks for your explanation! I think your modification is reasonable
and I have run tests against your patch, no regression is found.
Though I still haven't figured out whether it is a gdb issue or crash
specific, however I think it is OK to accept your patch for now. So I
will ack your No.1 and No.2 patch. Though No.2 patch needs some
cleanup on the code, but I think that is just a minor change, I have
no objection to its major part.
So ack.
Applied:
[
1] https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/
commit/2cf1a93805a8df6a2a4b7fde8d57b6d873c1bbeb <
https://github.com/
crash-utility/crash/commit/2cf1a93805a8df6a2a4b7fde8d57b6d873c1bbeb>
[
2] https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/commit/
b982ddc4d66dcd59e567201428eb6191e4a24695 <
https://github.com/crash-
utility/crash/commit/b982ddc4d66dcd59e567201428eb6191e4a24695>
BTW: regenerated the patch for [2].