From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10596 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2018 19:35:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 10577 invoked by uid 89); 9 Apr 2018 19:35:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:35:45 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id w39JZdh7013610 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 15:35:43 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 211A31EF60; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 15:35:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from simark.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 350811E073; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 15:35:38 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:35:00 -0000 From: Simon Marchi To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Defer breakpoint reset when cloning progspace for fork child In-Reply-To: References: <20180330190132.20823-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <790ab9233396d15d8227212fb3e33993@polymtl.ca> <399a5e0a-ce06-ace9-913c-e71aa2f15fe4@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1df7e229d358d1f993ad725096e6f69f@polymtl.ca> X-Sender: simon.marchi@polymtl.ca User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.4 X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Mon, 9 Apr 2018 19:35:39 +0000 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-04/txt/msg00166.txt.bz2 On 2018-04-09 15:21, Pedro Alves wrote: > While a board file as a new test more may be useful, I think there's > value in having smoke tests that run with the default board too. Just > like we have other tests in the tree that exercise basic PIE, gdb > index, > fission, etc. already. E.g., we test PIE+exec in > gdb.base/pie-execl.exp. > > I was not saying to update the existing fork tests, but instead to > add the small test that you described in the commit log as a testcase. > > Let me put it another way -- I suspect that if you had discovered > this issue on a system with a compiler that does _not_ emit PIE > by default, you'd have likely considered adding a small test. Ok, I agree. Simon