public inbox for gdb-patches@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] xfail gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp for aarch64 and gcc 7.5.0
@ 2022-09-07 14:45 Tom de Vries
  2022-09-07 16:35 ` Luis Machado
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Tom de Vries @ 2022-09-07 14:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gdb-patches

Hi,

On aarch64-linux, with gcc 7.5.0, we run into:
...
 (gdb) frame^M
 #0  callee.increment (val=99.0, val@entry=9.18340949e-41, msg=...) at \
   callee.adb:21^M
 21            if Val > 200.0 then^M
 (gdb) FAIL: gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp: scenario=all: frame
...

The problem is a GCC bug, filed as "PR98148 - [AArch64] Wrong location
expression for function entry values" (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98148 ).

Xfail the test for aarch64 and gcc 7.

Tested on x86_64-linux and aarch64-linux.

Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29418

Any comments?

Thanks,
- Tom

[gdb/testsuite] xfail gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp for aarch64 and gcc 7.5.0

---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp
index 0c2969e0c4f..062a27572f5 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp
@@ -19,6 +19,13 @@ if { [skip_ada_tests] } { return -1 }
 
 standard_ada_testfile foo
 
+set have_xfail 0
+if { [is_aarch64_target] } then {
+    if { [gcc_major_version] <= 8 } {
+       set have_xfail 1
+    }
+}
+
 foreach_with_prefix scenario {all minimal} {
     set flags [list debug \
 		   optimize=-O2 \
@@ -32,6 +39,21 @@ foreach_with_prefix scenario {all minimal} {
 
     runto "increment"
 
-    gdb_test "frame" \
+    set re \
 	"#0\\s+callee\\.increment \\(val(=val@entry)?=99\\.0, msg=\\.\\.\\.\\).*"
+    set re_different_entry_val \
+       "#0\\s+callee\\.increment \\(val=99.0, val@entry=.*, msg=\\.\\.\\.\\).*"
+    gdb_test_multiple "frame" "" {
+       -re -wrap $re {
+	   pass $gdb_test_name
+       }
+       -re -wrap $re_different_entry_val {
+	   if { $have_xfail } {
+	      # GCC PR98148
+	      xfail $gdb_test_name
+	   } else {
+	      fail $gdb_test_name
+	   }
+       }
+    }
 }

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] xfail gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp for aarch64 and gcc 7.5.0
  2022-09-07 14:45 [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] xfail gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp for aarch64 and gcc 7.5.0 Tom de Vries
@ 2022-09-07 16:35 ` Luis Machado
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Luis Machado @ 2022-09-07 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tom de Vries, gdb-patches

Hi,

On 9/7/22 15:45, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On aarch64-linux, with gcc 7.5.0, we run into:
> ...
>   (gdb) frame^M
>   #0  callee.increment (val=99.0, val@entry=9.18340949e-41, msg=...) at \
>     callee.adb:21^M
>   21            if Val > 200.0 then^M
>   (gdb) FAIL: gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp: scenario=all: frame
> ...
> 
> The problem is a GCC bug, filed as "PR98148 - [AArch64] Wrong location
> expression for function entry values" (
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98148 ).

I had forgotten about that report. :-)

> 
> Xfail the test for aarch64 and gcc 7.
> 
> Tested on x86_64-linux and aarch64-linux.
> 
> Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29418
> 
> Any comments?

That seems like a fair approach to me.

> 
> Thanks,
> - Tom
> 
> [gdb/testsuite] xfail gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp for aarch64 and gcc 7.5.0
> 
> ---
>   gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
>   1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp
> index 0c2969e0c4f..062a27572f5 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp
> @@ -19,6 +19,13 @@ if { [skip_ada_tests] } { return -1 }
>   
>   standard_ada_testfile foo
>   
> +set have_xfail 0
> +if { [is_aarch64_target] } then {
> +    if { [gcc_major_version] <= 8 } {
> +       set have_xfail 1
> +    }
> +}
> +
>   foreach_with_prefix scenario {all minimal} {
>       set flags [list debug \
>   		   optimize=-O2 \
> @@ -32,6 +39,21 @@ foreach_with_prefix scenario {all minimal} {
>   
>       runto "increment"
>   
> -    gdb_test "frame" \
> +    set re \
>   	"#0\\s+callee\\.increment \\(val(=val@entry)?=99\\.0, msg=\\.\\.\\.\\).*"
> +    set re_different_entry_val \
> +       "#0\\s+callee\\.increment \\(val=99.0, val@entry=.*, msg=\\.\\.\\.\\).*"
> +    gdb_test_multiple "frame" "" {
> +       -re -wrap $re {
> +	   pass $gdb_test_name
> +       }
> +       -re -wrap $re_different_entry_val {
> +	   if { $have_xfail } {
> +	      # GCC PR98148
> +	      xfail $gdb_test_name
> +	   } else {
> +	      fail $gdb_test_name
> +	   }
> +       }
> +    }
>   }


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2022-09-07 16:35 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-09-07 14:45 [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] xfail gdb.ada/O2_float_param.exp for aarch64 and gcc 7.5.0 Tom de Vries
2022-09-07 16:35 ` Luis Machado

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).