From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DF6938708C4 for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 12:39:17 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 6DF6938708C4 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [217.28.27.60]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8D471E0D3; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 08:39:16 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1679747957; bh=tsVz6gpew08sOtEmxqRvfCdnWyjAO/cxe1sA36ef3r0=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=a0qUGMZ/VefOw1eeWTMR+393V3/WhBDvBTTIlloWIEZvlqtzumUm4tTtuhWKKHCQQ vngK65fElp2bUUSnOiaxk5VmRFTskQ5iGyAcMB3pxqNW3BJn1470Ujz9DjMlqBPfSy zTpiLNC4V4nEHvAF1xnsopn4reBQLIvjQ9uo3VMU= Message-ID: <9cf51eb9-c731-6f42-ab2b-a37048f25d12@simark.ca> Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2023 08:39:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 ] PowerPC: fix for gdb.reverse/finish-precsave.exp and gdb.reverse/finish-reverse.exp Content-Language: en-US To: Carl Love , Tom de Vries , Ulrich Weigand , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , Bruno Larsen , "pedro@palves.net" References: <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> <7639de48695d52a806627b0a91979ad2e5fd9b42.camel@us.ibm.com> From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: <7639de48695d52a806627b0a91979ad2e5fd9b42.camel@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_MANYTO,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham 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 3/24/23 18:16, Carl Love wrote: > 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 I also saw these regressions, but they are fixed (by that commit). This seems like a different thing. > Are you testing with this fix? Yes, and I just tried with today's master, same thing. > 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 " That's odd, I never had to do that thing with GDBFLAGS. What happens when you don't specify it? For reference, here's an example failure: 147 reverse-next^M 148 81 b = 5;^M 149 (gdb) FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 1 LEP from function body 150 reverse-next^M 151 80 a = 1;^M 152 (gdb) FAIL: gdb.reverse/finish-reverse-next.exp: reverse next 2 at b = 5, from function body Simon