* [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp for aarch64
@ 2022-09-13 14:48 Tom de Vries
2022-09-13 16:00 ` Luis Machado
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Tom de Vries @ 2022-09-13 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Hi,
[ Another attempt at fixing the problem described in commit cd919f5533c
("[gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp"). ]
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,
- Tom
[gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp for aarch64
---
gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp | 17 ++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
index 053f7229537..3827ed744b5 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
@@ -188,13 +188,20 @@ proc out_line { name cu_dir cu_name line_dir line_name } {
.Lline_${name}_lines:
.byte 3 /* DW_LNS_advance_line */
- .sleb128 998 /* ... to 999 */
+ .sleb128 997 /* ... to 998 */
.byte 0 /* DW_LNE_set_address */
.uleb128 ${addr_len}+1
.byte 2
.${addr_len}byte $name_start
.byte 1 /* DW_LNS_copy */
.byte 3 /* DW_LNS_advance_line */
+ .sleb128 1 /* ... to 999 */
+ .byte 0 /* DW_LNE_set_address */
+ .uleb128 ${addr_len}+1
+ .byte 2
+ .${addr_len}byte ${name}_label
+ .byte 1 /* DW_LNS_copy */
+ .byte 3 /* DW_LNS_advance_line */
.sleb128 1 /* ... to 1000 */
.byte 0 /* DW_LNE_set_address */
.uleb128 ${addr_len}+1
@@ -451,19 +458,19 @@ proc test { func compdir filename } {
}
gdb_breakpoint ${func}_label
- gdb_continue_to_breakpoint $func "$func \\(\\) at .*"
+ gdb_test "continue" "$func \\(\\) at .*" "continue to $func"
gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display absolute"
verbose -log "expect: ${absolute}"
- gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp ${absolute}]:999" "absolute"
+ gdb_test "frame" "$func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp ${absolute}]:999" "absolute"
gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display basename"
verbose -log "expect: [file tail $filename]"
- gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp [file tail $filename]]:999" "basename"
+ gdb_test "frame" "$func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp [file tail $filename]]:999" "basename"
gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display relative"
verbose -log "expect: $filename"
- gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp $filename]:999" "relative"
+ gdb_test "frame" "$func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp $filename]:999" "relative"
}
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp for aarch64
2022-09-13 14:48 [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp for aarch64 Tom de Vries
@ 2022-09-13 16:00 ` Luis Machado
2022-09-14 8:36 ` Tom de Vries
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Luis Machado @ 2022-09-13 16:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom de Vries, gdb-patches
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. :-)
>
> 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.
>
> Thanks,
> - Tom
>
> [gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp for aarch64
>
> ---
> gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp | 17 ++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
> index 053f7229537..3827ed744b5 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
> @@ -188,13 +188,20 @@ proc out_line { name cu_dir cu_name line_dir line_name } {
>
> .Lline_${name}_lines:
> .byte 3 /* DW_LNS_advance_line */
> - .sleb128 998 /* ... to 999 */
> + .sleb128 997 /* ... to 998 */
> .byte 0 /* DW_LNE_set_address */
> .uleb128 ${addr_len}+1
> .byte 2
> .${addr_len}byte $name_start
> .byte 1 /* DW_LNS_copy */
> .byte 3 /* DW_LNS_advance_line */
> + .sleb128 1 /* ... to 999 */
> + .byte 0 /* DW_LNE_set_address */
> + .uleb128 ${addr_len}+1
> + .byte 2
> + .${addr_len}byte ${name}_label
> + .byte 1 /* DW_LNS_copy */
> + .byte 3 /* DW_LNS_advance_line */
> .sleb128 1 /* ... to 1000 */
> .byte 0 /* DW_LNE_set_address */
> .uleb128 ${addr_len}+1
> @@ -451,19 +458,19 @@ proc test { func compdir filename } {
> }
>
> gdb_breakpoint ${func}_label
> - gdb_continue_to_breakpoint $func "$func \\(\\) at .*"
> + gdb_test "continue" "$func \\(\\) at .*" "continue to $func"
>
> gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display absolute"
> verbose -log "expect: ${absolute}"
> - gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp ${absolute}]:999" "absolute"
> + gdb_test "frame" "$func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp ${absolute}]:999" "absolute"
>
> gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display basename"
> verbose -log "expect: [file tail $filename]"
> - gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp [file tail $filename]]:999" "basename"
> + gdb_test "frame" "$func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp [file tail $filename]]:999" "basename"
>
> gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display relative"
> verbose -log "expect: $filename"
> - gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp $filename]:999" "relative"
> + gdb_test "frame" "$func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp $filename]:999" "relative"
> }
> }
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp for aarch64
2022-09-13 16:00 ` Luis Machado
@ 2022-09-14 8:36 ` Tom de Vries
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Tom de Vries @ 2022-09-14 8:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luis Machado, gdb-patches
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-09-14 8:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-09-13 14:48 [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp for aarch64 Tom de Vries
2022-09-13 16:00 ` Luis Machado
2022-09-14 8:36 ` Tom de Vries
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).