From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20ABC385800F for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:15:56 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 20ABC385800F Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 136G5AoL035067 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 12:15:55 -0400 Received: from ppma05fra.de.ibm.com (6c.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.108]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 37q596446k-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:15:55 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 136GFapB008012 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:15:52 GMT Received: from b06avi18626390.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06avi18626390.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.26.192]) by ppma05fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 37q2nr976k-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 06 Apr 2021 16:15:52 +0000 Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.61]) by b06avi18626390.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 136GFTEX23593384 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:15:29 GMT Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E40FF11C05B; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:15:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D152E11C04C; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:15:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc3748833570.ibm.com (unknown [9.145.34.103]) by d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:15:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: by oc3748833570.ibm.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 40E04D803D6; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 18:15:49 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 18:15:49 +0200 From: Ulrich Weigand To: will schmidt Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH,rs6000] Fix vsx-regs.exp testcase failure Message-ID: <20210406161549.GA19230@oc3748833570.ibm.com> References: <3f9ea0771af5b59585df53000683aa8298ec4af2.camel@vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3f9ea0771af5b59585df53000683aa8298ec4af2.camel@vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: ngz76Ub3tf7hb7Hk4cUVMO9YoDg8Vaki X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: ngz76Ub3tf7hb7Hk4cUVMO9YoDg8Vaki X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.369, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-04-06_04:2021-04-06, 2021-04-06 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=608 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104030000 definitions=main-2104060107 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 16:15:57 -0000 On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 03:39:26PM -0500, will schmidt wrote: > > Hi, > This test (gdb.arch/vsx-regs.exp) exercises updates to the > F0-F31 and VS0-VS31 registers and verifies updates to the same. > Note that the registers overlap; the doubleword[1] portion of > any VS0-VS31 register contains the F0-F31 register contents, so > any updates to one can be measured in the other. > > Per a brief investigation, we see that dl_main() currently > uses some VSX instructions, so the VS* values are not > going to be zero when this testcase reaches main, where these > tests begin. The test harness does not explicitly > initialize the full VS* values, so the first test loop > that updates the F* values means our VS* values are > partially uninitalized and will fail the first set of checks. > This update explicitly initializes the doubleword[0] portion > of the VS* registers, to allow this test to succeed. > > YYYY-MM-DD Will Schmidt > > gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: > * gdb.arch/vsx-regs.exp: Initilize vs* doublewords. Typo "Initialize". Otherwise this is OK. Thanks, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU/Linux compilers and toolchain Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com