From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C86513858D28 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:07 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org C86513858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=us.ibm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=us.ibm.com Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 32OKCBOi019049; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:03 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : from : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version : subject; s=pp1; bh=o0Hjsg4bbMhzw/ZNIa4soAw6MimvTnouFeVmOy+ydgE=; b=dXfeQJ/SQON5XYORZ4m1PcrPsqfNav97PCDU5HihMdBm27q8FhPGvp62GCJCPXDPls4i B7Q2PeGwoJ/MIqWDEIa/eFE2U2SpHwnKVg5GUShEg4ndnHAZ5E9kOgtcKCXG4Bmipra2 0IiEyzkLzFTmJHKg/5jEInCVrF+1tIqK8+8d37VDroMRxQ9ec5HahgVWQA4ZI9Ekigrj VOVuYGe47gcl4IDZdebKhJ4PV5+kDC0bY71/Z55QVdvTYfhpgDcsSjTUzPLUzqujqfVP NdAci/CbpWw+2QANn3x3s2MUAJJ/z6La6PdHz3Hxrj8Ulw4Ax1/qz+Zjf5P9VwcgXBxM 8w== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3phjpettm8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:03 +0000 Received: from m0098409.ppops.net (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 32OMCk5A021247; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:03 GMT Received: from ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (ba.79.3fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.63.121.186]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3phjpettkv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:02 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 32OK7OtZ025885; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:01 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([9.208.129.120]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3pgycnwsv8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:01 +0000 Received: from smtpav06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [10.39.53.233]) by smtprelay02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 32OMH0Hc21430982 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:00 GMT Received: from smtpav06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E9B458055; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:17:00 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E06F5803F; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:16:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-e362e14c-2378-11b2-a85c-87d605f3c641.ibm.com (unknown [9.211.103.7]) by smtpav06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Mar 2023 22:16:59 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <7639de48695d52a806627b0a91979ad2e5fd9b42.camel@us.ibm.com> From: Carl Love To: Simon Marchi , Tom de Vries , Ulrich Weigand , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , Bruno Larsen , "pedro@palves.net" Cc: cel@us.ibm.com Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2023 15:16:58 -0700 In-Reply-To: <5e60a837-b21c-011f-c94e-e8bbf7645c5d@simark.ca> References: <65d44121-65f7-a212-79ec-07ce53c15ecb@suse.de> <9fe94c0979cb40979b0dea7693a901c2d9f66164.camel@us.ibm.com> <59417813-eb4a-baf8-4e5d-e225d6732f71@suse.de> <7a494157-494f-6adf-d533-bf373b0f054f@redhat.com> <71aa635593df0677811afb85409aa190bcfa4f6a.camel@us.ibm.com> <15864a6b87b25c93e99a28149f23138267735f2a.camel@us.ibm.com> <041f62e9f26fd4a536bc90c34f072985582e6237.camel@de.ibm.com> <46c2c756475ba5923d7eed97996632a08285dd42.camel@us.ibm.com> <65861786-069e-53a1-ca17-a525b6629c95@suse.de> <5be0c849abeef84d34a6ff255fb2705ca5dcb035.camel@us.ibm.com> <5e60a837-b21c-011f-c94e-e8bbf7645c5d@simark.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-18.el8) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: GKwoBtTJpmRi8A8sG2G43Ah8M_RoZoEu X-Proofpoint-GUID: URLsbqRiY3EuhDZL0TJpOE6ApVc9yWr3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2 ] PowerPC: fix for gdb.reverse/finish-precsave.exp and gdb.reverse/finish-reverse.exp X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.254,Aquarius:18.0.942,Hydra:6.0.573,FMLib:17.11.170.22 definitions=2023-03-24_11,2023-03-24_01,2023-02-09_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=929 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2303200000 definitions=main-2303240169 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_MANYTO,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Fri, 2023-03-24 at 13:23 -0400, Simon Marchi wrote: > > I don't know if that particular failure has been reported yet, but I > see > these failures when running with native-gdbserver or > native-extended-gdbserver: > > $ make check TESTS="gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp" > RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=native-gdbserver" > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse-finish function1 > LEP call from LEP > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 1 LEP entry > point function call from LEP > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 2, at b = > 5, call from LEP > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse-finish function1 > LEP call from function body > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 1 LEP from > function body > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 2 at b = 5, > from function body > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: function1 GEP call call > from GEP > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 1 GEP entry > point function call from GEP > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 2 at b = > 50, call from GEP > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: function1 GEP call call > from GEP again > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 1 GEP entry > point function call from GEP again > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 2 at b = > 50, call from GEP again > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse-finish function1 > GEP call, from function body > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 1 GEP call > from function body > FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 2 at b = 50 > from function body Yes, there was a regression failure. The following was committed to fix the reported regression issues. https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2023-March/198139.html Are you testing with this fix? I don't normally run the tests with --target_board=native-gdbserver but I did try that and it seemed to work for me. Note I had to also specify GDBFLAGS to get the test to run. Specifically, I used the command: make check TESTS="gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp" RUNTESTFLAGS="GDBFLAGS=' ' --target_board=native-gdbserver " The test ran fine and reported 40 passes and no errors. Carl