RE: [PATCH v3 03/14] change gdb.base/symbol-alias to xfail with clang

[Bruno Larsen <blarsen@redhat.com>]

Hi Jini,

Great to hear that Kavitha's changes have landed on clang! I do think
that it is still important to have xfails, however, since only new
clangs would add the information, and GDB is tested in all manner of
systems.

I have changed the patch to assume that clang 15 has Kavitha's patches,
and changed the clang compiler test.  Does this look acceptable?

[PATCH v4 03/14] gdb/testsuite: Change gdb.base/symbol-alias to xfail with old clang

Clang didn't use to add alias information, even when using -gfull.  This
commit checks if the clang version being used is already providing alias
information (15 or newer), otherwise it adds an XFAIL.
---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp | 9 +++++++--
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp
index 289f49bbc3f..078158dc101 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp
@@ -31,6 +31,11 @@ foreach f {"func" "func_alias"} {
 }
 
 # Variables.
-foreach v {"g_var_s" "g_var_s_alias"} {
-    gdb_test "p $v" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}"
+gdb_test "p g_var_s" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}"
+
+# Clang didn't include alias information until version 15.
+if {[test_compiler_info {clang-[1-9]*}]
+     || [test_compiler_info {clang-1[0-4]*}]} {
+    setup_xfail "clang/52664" *-*-*
 }
+gdb_test "p g_var_s_alias" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}"
-- 
2.31.1