From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from alt-proxy28.mail.unifiedlayer.com (alt-proxy28.mail.unifiedlayer.com [74.220.216.123]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A053B3858D1E for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 20:56:43 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org A053B3858D1E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tromey.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tromey.com Received: from cmgw12.mail.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.0.90.127]) by progateway1.mail.pro1.eigbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6A3B1003899B for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 20:56:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id RItXqfPcUmRvpRItXqI3p8; Wed, 02 Aug 2023 20:56:35 +0000 X-Authority-Reason: nr=8 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=F/qSyotN c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=64cac303 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:117 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:17 a=OWjo9vPv0XrRhIrVQ50Ab3nP57M=:19 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=UttIx32zK-AA:10:nop_rcvd_month_year a=Qbun_eYptAEA:10:endurance_base64_authed_username_1 a=h6SB8EqDGjW_95u9WcQA:9 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References :Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=WiNv/d9hdAacGmrcwSUdO9L9pfYl+MqaHNgiltscYhg=; b=Es9Fmk5vQJYEuChcjPkuXL3pbb oUs6Y0HdpC7O4vkJUQrsG7mCu6TjmeueBDEEQHRzMSZ5cqc1VAVy+BpjG77O/cQWPjQBl6snJREt0 0PXM1Kks3EBmB2IY958+xa9/M; Received: from 75-166-148-59.hlrn.qwest.net ([75.166.148.59]:53282 helo=murgatroyd) by box5379.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1qRItX-003FqH-1s; Wed, 02 Aug 2023 14:56:35 -0600 From: Tom Tromey To: Rainer Orth Cc: Andrew Burgess , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Guard against killing unrelated processes in amd64-disp-step.exp References: <875y6li9as.fsf@redhat.com> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2023 14:56:34 -0600 In-Reply-To: (Rainer Orth's message of "Tue, 01 Aug 2023 16:05:40 +0200") Message-ID: <87zg39b1tp.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box5379.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - sourceware.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tromey.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 75.166.148.59 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1qRItX-003FqH-1s X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 75-166-148-59.hlrn.qwest.net (murgatroyd) [75.166.148.59]:53282 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 41 X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3018.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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: >>>>> "Rainer" == Rainer Orth writes: >>> gdb_assert {[expr $inferior_pid > 0]} \ >>> "check for a sane inferior pid" >>> if {$inferior_pid > 0} { >>> remote_exec target "kill -ALRM $inferior_pid" >>> } >>> >>> This way you will still see a FAIL. >> >> True, but you will also see quite a bunch of PASSes in the working case >> that tell you nothing. Seems like unnecessary noise to me. Isn't there >> another way to convey the failure info without that noise? Rainer> how should we proceed with this patch? It would be a pity to release Rainer> GDB 14 with make check killing the whole session on Solaris... I think just adding Andrew's proposed assert to your patch should be good enough. The idea behind the assert is so that we can detect the bad case, if it ever happens, on a platform that is otherwise ok. The noise of an extra pass doesn't seem so bad, we have zillions of those already. The noise from the fail also shouldn't be too bad since, IIRC, you said this test is already not fully passing on Solaris. Anyway to sum up, the assert would be there as a "just in case" for other platforms, not Solaris. thanks, Tom