* [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed.
@ 2013-12-10 14:43 Andrew Burgess
2013-12-10 15:07 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Burgess @ 2013-12-10 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Ran into a case where we call test_compiler_info without
first calling get_compiler_info.
I was going to just add an extra call to get_compiler_info,
but then I got all carried away.... with this patch
test_compiler_info now calls get_compiler_info if needed.
I also remove a couple of uses of the compiler_info
variable and replace with calls to test_compiler_info instead.
OK to apply?
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
* gdb.base/watchpoint.exp (test_complex_watchpoint): Remove use of
compiler_info global, instead call test_compiler_info.
* gdb.cp/temargs.exp: Same.
* lib/gdb.exp (compiler_info): Change initial value to empty string.
(test_compiler_info): Call get_compiler_info if compiler_info is
empty string.
(skip_vsx_tests): No longer need to call get_compiler_info.
(skip_altivec_tests): Same.
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint.exp
index 9576a9e..73dc5cc 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint.exp
@@ -464,12 +464,12 @@ proc test_complex_watchpoint {} {
pass $test
}
-re "can't compute CFA for this frame.*\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
- global compiler_info no_hw
+ global no_hw
# GCC < 4.5.0 does not get LOCATIONS_VALID set by dwarf2read.c.
# Therefore epilogue unwinder gets applied which is
# incompatible with dwarf2_frame_cfa.
- verbose -log "compiler_info: $compiler_info"
+ verbose -log "compiler_info: [test_compiler_info]"
if {$no_hw && ([test_compiler_info {gcc-[0-3]-*}]
|| [test_compiler_info {gcc-4-[0-4]-*}])} {
xfail "$test (old GCC has broken watchpoints in epilogues)"
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp
index 4cd9da5..31cde41 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ if {![runto_main]} {
# NOTE: prepare_for_testing calls get_compiler_info, which we need
# for the test_compiler_info calls.
# gcc 4.4 and earlier don't emit enough info for some of our template tests.
-verbose -log "compiler_info: $compiler_info"
+verbose -log "compiler_info: [test_compiler_info]"
set have_older_template_gcc 0
set have_pr_41736_fixed 1
set have_pr_45024_fixed 1
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
index 2c1cf29..6340e80 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
@@ -2027,10 +2027,6 @@ gdb_caching_proc skip_altivec_tests {
# Make sure we have a compiler that understands altivec.
set compile_flags {debug nowarnings}
- if [get_compiler_info] {
- warning "Could not get compiler info"
- return 1
- }
if [test_compiler_info gcc*] {
set compile_flags "$compile_flags additional_flags=-maltivec"
} elseif [test_compiler_info xlc*] {
@@ -2110,10 +2106,6 @@ gdb_caching_proc skip_vsx_tests {
# Make sure we have a compiler that understands altivec.
set compile_flags {debug nowarnings quiet}
- if [get_compiler_info] {
- warning "Could not get compiler info"
- return 1
- }
if [test_compiler_info gcc*] {
set compile_flags "$compile_flags additional_flags=-mvsx"
} elseif [test_compiler_info xlc*] {
@@ -2401,7 +2393,7 @@ proc skip_libstdcxx_probe_tests {} {
return $ok
}
-set compiler_info "unknown"
+set compiler_info ""
set gcc_compiled 0
set hp_cc_compiler 0
set hp_aCC_compiler 0
@@ -2552,6 +2544,14 @@ proc get_compiler_info {{arg ""}} {
proc test_compiler_info { {compiler ""} } {
global compiler_info
+ # Check that compiler_info has been initialised
+ if [string match "" $compiler_info] {
+ if [get_compiler_info] {
+ warning "Could not get compiler info"
+ return -1
+ }
+ }
+
# if no arg, return the compiler_info string
if [string match "" $compiler] {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed.
2013-12-10 14:43 [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed Andrew Burgess
@ 2013-12-10 15:07 ` Pedro Alves
2013-12-10 15:16 ` Andrew Burgess
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2013-12-10 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Burgess; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/10/2013 02:43 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> proc test_compiler_info { {compiler ""} } {
> global compiler_info
>
> + # Check that compiler_info has been initialised
> + if [string match "" $compiler_info] {
> + if [get_compiler_info] {
> + warning "Could not get compiler info"
> + return -1
> + }
> + }
What about get_compiler_info's $arg?
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed.
2013-12-10 15:07 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2013-12-10 15:16 ` Andrew Burgess
2013-12-10 15:49 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Burgess @ 2013-12-10 15:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 10/12/2013 3:00 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 12/10/2013 02:43 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
>> proc test_compiler_info { {compiler ""} } {
>> global compiler_info
>>
>> + # Check that compiler_info has been initialised
>> + if [string match "" $compiler_info] {
>> + if [get_compiler_info] {
>> + warning "Could not get compiler info"
>> + return -1
>> + }
>> + }
>
> What about get_compiler_info's $arg?
In the cases where I removed calls to get_compiler_info no arg was being
passed anyway, my assumption then is that in most cases the "default"
result of get_compiler_info is fine.
If you really want to pass some args to get_compiler_info you can still
do that in a separate call, and I left in place (in gdb.exp) a call that
does just this.
The code in test_compiler_info will not overwrite an existing
compiler_info value, so if you've taken care to call get_compiler_info
yourself then all should still work as expected.
Thanks,
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed.
2013-12-10 15:16 ` Andrew Burgess
@ 2013-12-10 15:49 ` Pedro Alves
2013-12-10 16:10 ` Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info. (was: Re: [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed.) Andrew Burgess
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2013-12-10 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Burgess; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/10/2013 03:16 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> On 10/12/2013 3:00 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 12/10/2013 02:43 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
>>> proc test_compiler_info { {compiler ""} } {
>>> global compiler_info
>>>
>>> + # Check that compiler_info has been initialised
>>> + if [string match "" $compiler_info] {
>>> + if [get_compiler_info] {
>>> + warning "Could not get compiler info"
>>> + return -1
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>
>> What about get_compiler_info's $arg?
>
> In the cases where I removed calls to get_compiler_info no arg was being
> passed anyway, my assumption then is that in most cases the "default"
> result of get_compiler_info is fine.
>
> If you really want to pass some args to get_compiler_info you can still
> do that in a separate call, and I left in place (in gdb.exp) a call that
> does just this.
>
> The code in test_compiler_info will not overwrite an existing
> compiler_info value, so if you've taken care to call get_compiler_info
> yourself then all should still work as expected.
Yes, but, if the interface will be "you don't need to call
get_compiler_info yourself, except ...", is there any gain in
doing this here? The current rule is "you need to call
get_compiler_info yourself, period.", which seems easier to
explain. E.g., here:
> @@ -2027,10 +2027,6 @@ gdb_caching_proc skip_altivec_tests {
>
> # Make sure we have a compiler that understands altivec.
> set compile_flags {debug nowarnings}
> - if [get_compiler_info] {
> - warning "Could not get compiler info"
> - return 1
> - }
> if [test_compiler_info gcc*] {
> set compile_flags "$compile_flags additional_flags=-maltivec"
> } elseif [test_compiler_info xlc*] {
Before, the removed get_compiler_info would always overwrite
whatever was in the compiler_info before. Now, if the previous
call to get_compiler_info happened to get an $arg,
test_compiler_info will now reuse the wrong compiler_info.
It seems to me that it should be get_compiler_info that
caches its results, not test_compiler_info, taking into
account $arg. And then, if we want to get rid of the
need to call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info,
then test_compiler_info should have likewise an $arg parameter
that gets passed down to the get_compiler_info call.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info. (was: Re: [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed.)
2013-12-10 15:49 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2013-12-10 16:10 ` Andrew Burgess
2013-12-10 16:26 ` Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Burgess @ 2013-12-10 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 10/12/2013 3:49 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 12/10/2013 03:16 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
>> On 10/12/2013 3:00 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>
>> @@ -2027,10 +2027,6 @@ gdb_caching_proc skip_altivec_tests {
>>
>> # Make sure we have a compiler that understands altivec.
>> set compile_flags {debug nowarnings}
>> - if [get_compiler_info] {
>> - warning "Could not get compiler info"
>> - return 1
>> - }
>> if [test_compiler_info gcc*] {
>> set compile_flags "$compile_flags additional_flags=-maltivec"
>> } elseif [test_compiler_info xlc*] {
>
> Before, the removed get_compiler_info would always overwrite
> whatever was in the compiler_info before. Now, if the previous
> call to get_compiler_info happened to get an $arg,
> test_compiler_info will now reuse the wrong compiler_info.
OK, I see. Here's a simpler solution that just adds the missing
call to get_compiler_info.
The example I found where this is an issue was: gdb.trace/pending.exp,
which pre-patch fails to build for me (when I run just that test), but
after the patch does run. There are probably other examples around.
OK to apply?
Thanks,
Andrew
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
* lib/gdb.exp (gdb_compile_shlib): Call get_compiler_info before
calling test_compiler_info.
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
index 2c1cf29..eddfb9d 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
@@ -2812,6 +2812,14 @@ proc gdb_compile_pthreads {source dest type options} {
proc gdb_compile_shlib {sources dest options} {
set obj_options $options
+ set info_options ""
+ if { [lsearch -exact $options "c++"] >= 0 } {
+ set info_options "c++"
+ }
+ if [get_compiler_info ${info_options}] {
+ return -1
+ }
+
switch -glob [test_compiler_info] {
"xlc-*" {
lappend obj_options "additional_flags=-qpic"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info.
2013-12-10 16:10 ` Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info. (was: Re: [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed.) Andrew Burgess
@ 2013-12-10 16:26 ` Pedro Alves
2013-12-10 17:10 ` Andrew Burgess
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2013-12-10 16:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Burgess; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/10/2013 04:10 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> On 10/12/2013 3:49 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 12/10/2013 03:16 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
>>> On 10/12/2013 3:00 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>
>>> @@ -2027,10 +2027,6 @@ gdb_caching_proc skip_altivec_tests {
>>>
>>> # Make sure we have a compiler that understands altivec.
>>> set compile_flags {debug nowarnings}
>>> - if [get_compiler_info] {
>>> - warning "Could not get compiler info"
>>> - return 1
>>> - }
>>> if [test_compiler_info gcc*] {
>>> set compile_flags "$compile_flags additional_flags=-maltivec"
>>> } elseif [test_compiler_info xlc*] {
>>
>> Before, the removed get_compiler_info would always overwrite
>> whatever was in the compiler_info before. Now, if the previous
>> call to get_compiler_info happened to get an $arg,
>> test_compiler_info will now reuse the wrong compiler_info.
>
> OK, I see. Here's a simpler solution that just adds the missing
> call to get_compiler_info.
>
> The example I found where this is an issue was: gdb.trace/pending.exp,
> which pre-patch fails to build for me (when I run just that test), but
> after the patch does run. There are probably other examples around.
>
> OK to apply?
OK, but please update the proc's intro comment:
# Build a shared library from SOURCES. You must use get_compiler_info
# first.
proc gdb_compile_shlib {sources dest options} {
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info.
2013-12-10 16:26 ` Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info Pedro Alves
@ 2013-12-10 17:10 ` Andrew Burgess
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Burgess @ 2013-12-10 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: gdb-patches
On 10/12/2013 4:26 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 12/10/2013 04:10 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
>> OK to apply?
>
> OK, but please update the proc's intro comment:
>
> # Build a shared library from SOURCES. You must use get_compiler_info
> # first.
>
> proc gdb_compile_shlib {sources dest options} {
Have pushed with truncated comment.
thanks,
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-12-10 17:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-12-10 14:43 [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed Andrew Burgess
2013-12-10 15:07 ` Pedro Alves
2013-12-10 15:16 ` Andrew Burgess
2013-12-10 15:49 ` Pedro Alves
2013-12-10 16:10 ` Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info. (was: Re: [PATCH] Call get_compiler_info directly from test_compiler_info if needed.) Andrew Burgess
2013-12-10 16:26 ` Call get_compiler_info before test_compiler_info Pedro Alves
2013-12-10 17:10 ` Andrew Burgess
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).