Re: [PATCH v2] gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp: Always initialize wpoffset_to_wpnum

[Luis Machado <luis.machado@arm.com>]

Hi,

On 4/25/23 11:47, Alexandra Hájková via Gdb-patches wrote:
> to avoid TCL error which happens in some aarch64 types.
> 
> ERROR: in testcase /root/build/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp
> ERROR:  can't read "wpoffset_to_wpnum(1)": no such element in array
> ERROR:  tcl error code TCL READ VARNAME
> ERROR:  tcl error info:
> can't read "wpoffset_to_wpnum(1)": no such element in array
>      while executing
> 
> Fixes bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30340
> ---
> The test uses gdb_test_multiple, and there are plenty of other reasons (see gdb_test_multiple in lib/gdb.exp) that a test using gdb_test_multiple might fail.  We're never going to recreate each of those in the gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp script just so that we can ensure the variable is initialized.  Instead we should just ensure the variable is always initialized.
>   
>   gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp | 3 ++-
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp
> index ce5a1e5bf66..d31a9cdc2c8 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp
> @@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ foreach wpcount {4 7} {
>       for {set wpoffset 1} {$wpoffset <= $wpcount} {incr wpoffset} {
>   	set test "$rwatch data.u.size1\[$wpoffset\]"
>   	set wpnum ""
> +	# Initialize the result incase the test fails.
> +	set wpoffset_to_wpnum($wpoffset) 0
>   	gdb_test_multiple $test $test {
>   	    -re "$rwatch_exp (\[0-9\]+): .*\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
>   		set wpoffset_to_wpnum($wpoffset) $expect_out(1,string)
> @@ -113,7 +115,6 @@ foreach wpcount {4 7} {
>   		    setup_xfail breakpoints/23131 "arm*-*-*"
>   		}
>   		fail $test
> -		set wpoffset_to_wpnum($wpoffset) 0
>   	    }
>   	}
>       }

Thanks. I think this approach is a reasonable one.

Reviewed-by: Luis Machado <luis.machado@arm.com>