RE: [PATCH v3 03/14] change gdb.base/symbol-alias to xfail with clang

["George, Jini Susan" <JiniSusan.George@amd.com>]

[Public]

Now that Kavitha's patch just got committed (details below), guess we might not require this.

commit 6df97c56ea0f3086c96743ec47148ee69fd8cf71 (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD)
Author: Kavitha Natarajan <kavitha.natarajan@amd.com>
Date:   Tue Jun 14 10:37:46 2022 +0530

    Debug support for global alias variable

    Starting with (future) Clang 15 (since
    https://reviews.llvm.org/D120989), Clang emits the DWARF information
    of global alias variables as DW_TAG_imported_declaration.  However,
    GDB does not handle it.  It incorrectly always reads this tag as
    C++/Fortran imported declaration (type alias, namespace alias and
    Fortran module).  This commit adds support to handle this tag as an
    alias variable.

    This change fixes the failures in the gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp
    testcase with current git Clang.  This testcase is also updated to
    test nested (recursive) aliases.

Thanks,
Jini.

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Gdb-patches <gdb-patches-
>>bounces+jigeorge=amd.com@sourceware.org> On Behalf Of Andrew Burgess
>>via Gdb-patches
>>Sent: Friday, June 10, 2022 4:31 PM
>>To: Bruno Larsen <blarsen@redhat.com>; gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>>Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 03/14] change gdb.base/symbol-alias to xfail with clang
>>
>>[CAUTION: External Email]
>>
>>Bruno Larsen via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:
>>
>>> Hi Jini,
>>>
>>> Great to hear that Kavitha's changes have landed on clang! I do think
>>> that it is still important to have xfails, however, since only new
>>> clangs would add the information, and GDB is tested in all manner of
>>> systems.
>>>
>>> I have changed the patch to assume that clang 15 has Kavitha's
>>> patches, and changed the clang compiler test.  Does this look acceptable?
>>>
>>> [PATCH v4 03/14] gdb/testsuite: Change gdb.base/symbol-alias to xfail
>>> with old clang
>>>
>>> Clang didn't use to add alias information, even when using -gfull.
>>> This commit checks if the clang version being used is already
>>> providing alias information (15 or newer), otherwise it adds an XFAIL.
>>
>>My understanding from Jini's email was that for this test to pass we would also
>>need this gdb patch:
>>
>>
>>https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsource
>>ware.org%2Fpipermail%2Fgdb-patches%2F2022-
>>April%2F188354.html&amp;data=05%7C01%7CJiniSusan.George%40amd.com%
>>7Ca2aaecea2df0476d781808da4ad0988b%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e
>>183d%7C0%7C0%7C637904557029019597%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJ
>>WIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C
>>3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=8%2FUKHMbpyAKXN4HOPHRJ2vP62yKK5i5Qeau
>>v0GQtWHo%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>
>>So, if I had clang 15 right now, this test would still fail, right?
>>
>>I guess you either need to hold this patch back until the above is merged, or put
>>this in with a generic "all clang" pattern (like you originally had) and then assume
>>someone will spot the KPASS and fix up the test later.
>>
>>Also...
>>
>>
>>> ---
>>>  gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp | 9 +++++++--
>>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp
>>> b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp
>>> index 289f49bbc3f..078158dc101 100644
>>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp
>>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp
>>> @@ -31,6 +31,11 @@ foreach f {"func" "func_alias"} {  }
>>>
>>>  # Variables.
>>> -foreach v {"g_var_s" "g_var_s_alias"} {
>>> -    gdb_test "p $v" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}"
>>> +gdb_test "p g_var_s" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}"
>>> +
>>> +# Clang didn't include alias information until version 15.
>>> +if {[test_compiler_info {clang-[1-9]*}]
>>> +     || [test_compiler_info {clang-1[0-4]*}]} {
>>
>>Wouldn't clang-15 match the first of these patterns?
>>
>>Thannks,
>>Andrew
>>
>>
>>> +    setup_xfail "clang/52664" *-*-*
>>>  }
>>> +gdb_test "p g_var_s_alias" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}"
>>> --
>>> 2.31.1