Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp for aarch64

[Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>]

On 9/13/22 18:00, Luis Machado wrote:
> On 9/13/22 15:48, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> [ Another attempt at fixing the problem described in commit cd919f5533c
>> ("[gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp"). ]
> 
> Tricky one. :-)
> 

It is indeed.

I just did a run with cc-with-debug-names target board, and ran into 
FAILs in the same test-case.  I haven't done root cause analysis yet, 
but my suspicion is that I'll need to add a .debug_aranges entries.

>>
>> When running the test-case gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp with
>> aarch64-linux, we run into:
>> ...
>> (gdb) continue^M
>> Continuing.^M
>> ^M
>> Breakpoint 2, compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename () at \
>>    tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c:999^M
>> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp: \
>>    compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: continue to 
>> breakpoint: \
>>    compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename
>> ...
>>
>> The breakpoint set at compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename_label,
>> address 0x400608 starts at a line entry:
>> ...
>> CU: tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c:
>> File name                    Line number    Starting address    
>> View    Stmt
>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c              999            
>> 0x400608               x
>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c             1000            
>> 0x40062c               x
>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c                -            0x40062c
>> ...
>> and therefore the breakpoint is printed without instruction address.
>>
>> In contrast, for x86_64-linux, we have the breakpoint printed with 
>> instruction
>> address:
>> ...
>> (gdb) continue^M
>> Continuing.^M
>> ^M
>> Breakpoint 2, 0x004004c1 in 
>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename () \
>>    at tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c:999^M
>> (gdb) PASS: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp: \
>>    compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: continue to 
>> breakpoint: \
>>    compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename
>> ...
>>
>> The breakpoint set at compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename_label,
>> address 0x004004c1 doesn't start at a line entry:
>> ...
>> CU: tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c:
>> File name                    Line number    Starting address    
>> View    Stmt
>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c              999            
>> 0x4004bd               x
>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c             1000            
>> 0x4004d3               x
>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c                -            0x4004d3
>> ...
>>
>> Fix this by:
>> - unifying behaviour between the archs by adding an explicit line 
>> number entry
>>    for the address compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename_label, 
>> making
>>    the FAIL reproducible on x86_64-linux.
>> - expecting the breakpoint to be printed without instruction address.
>>
>> Tested on x86_64-linux and aarch64-linux.
>>
>> Any comments?
> 
> Thanks for the quick patch.
> 
>  From my end it looks good, and makes the tests pass again.
> 

Ack, I'll commit today.

Thanks,
- Tom