Re: [RFC][gdb/testsuite] Register test for each arch separately in register_test_foreach_arch

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

On 9/20/21 6:01 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2021-09-13 11:40 a.m., Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In gdb/disasm-selftests.c we have:
>> ...
>>   selftests::register_test_foreach_arch ("print_one_insn",
>>                                          selftests::print_one_insn_test);
>> ...
>> and we get:
>> ...
>> $ gdb -q -batch -ex "maint selftest print_one_insn" 2>&1 \
>>   | grep ^Running
>> Running selftest print_one_insn.
>> $
>> ...
>>
>> Change the semantics register_test_foreach_arch such that a version of
>> print_one_insn is registered for each architecture, such that we have:
>> ...
>> $ gdb -q -batch -ex "maint selftest print_one_insn" 2>&1 \
>>   | grep ^Running
>> Running selftest print_one_insn::A6.
>> Running selftest print_one_insn::A7.
>> Running selftest print_one_insn::ARC600.
>>   ...
>> $
>> ...
>>
>> This makes it f.i. possible to do:
>> ...
>> $ gdb -q -batch a.out -ex "maint selftest print_one_insn::armv8.1-m.main"
>> Running selftest print_one_insn::armv8.1-m.main.
>> Self test failed: self-test failed at src/gdb/disasm-selftests.c:165
>> Ran 1 unit tests, 1 failed
>> ...
>>
>> Currently this runs into a bfd problem, filed at PR28336 - "bfd printable arch
>> names not unique" ( https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28336 ).
>>
>> Any comments?
> 
> I think the idea is good.

Great :)

> It's still possible to run the test for all
> arches, since the argument to "maint selftest" can match just a subset
> of the test name.  So we don't lose anything.

Ack.

> The problem with PR28336
> makes it so that we try to register tests with duplicate names, and that
> asserts?

Yes, but that PR's fixed now, so that assert no longer triggers.

[ FWIW, we could make things less dramatic by not asserting but throwing
an exception in register_test, and handling the exception in
register_test_foreach_arch.  But there's no immediate need atm, so I'll
leave it as is in this patch. ]

Thanks,
- Tom