From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15862 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2013 10:16:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 15850 invoked by uid 89); 10 Sep 2013 10:16:01 -0000 Received: from e28smtp02.in.ibm.com (HELO e28smtp02.in.ibm.com) (122.248.162.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 10:16:01 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: e28smtp02.in.ibm.com Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp02.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:35:00 +0530 Received: from d28dlp03.in.ibm.com (9.184.220.128) by e28smtp02.in.ibm.com (192.168.1.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:34:59 +0530 Received: from d28relay02.in.ibm.com (d28relay02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.59]) by d28dlp03.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4A121258043 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:45:52 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (d28av02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.64]) by d28relay02.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r8AAHoU527459670 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:47:51 +0530 Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d28av02.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r8AAFnD2010834 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:45:50 +0530 Received: from d23ml188.in.ibm.com (d23ml188.in.ibm.com [9.182.8.144]) by d28av02.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id r8AAFn2Y010808; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:45:49 +0530 In-Reply-To: References: <20130822233234.GA13292@adacore.com> <20130823004837.GC5221@adacore.com> <20130823133415.GD5221@adacore.com> Subject: Re: [RFA/ppc-aix] fix thread support breakage (was: "Re: [PATCH 4/5] powerpc64-aix ptrace64 when defined.") X-KeepSent: C7611E7B:F19F366D-65257BE2:003745A0; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: David Edelsohn Cc: Joel Brobecker , GDB Patches , Mark Kettenis , Ulrich Weigand Message-ID: From: Raunaq 12 Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 10:16:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-TM-AS-MML: No X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 13091010-5816-0000-0000-000009D2F48D X-SW-Source: 2013-09/txt/msg00327.txt.bz2 David Edelsohn wrote on 08/23/2013 08:44:23 PM: > From: David Edelsohn > To: Joel Brobecker > Cc: Raunaq 12/India/IBM@IBMIN, GDB Patches , Mark Kettenis > , Ulrich Weigand > Date: 08/23/2013 08:43 PM > Subject: Re: [RFA/ppc-aix] fix thread support breakage (was: "Re: [PATCH 4/5] powerpc64-aix > ptrace64 when defined.") > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > >> Is there a testcase that can be added to the GDB testsuite to catch > >> this type of regression? > > > > All testcases involving thread support should reveal this type of > > failure. I cannot remember exactly how this patch was tested, but > > ISTR that it couldn't be tested through the official testsuite, > > for some reasons that were deemed reasonable... > > Uli and I both asked Raunaq if the patch had been tested with the > testsuite. However, the testsuite may not have been run with the full > matrix: GDB32 -> Testsuite32, GDB32 ->Testsuite64, GDB64 -> > Testsuite32, GDB64 -> Testsuite64. Was out of office for a while so couldn't reply earlier. Sorry for that. David, my intention was to run test cases for all the combinations that you have mentioned above. Since we use XLC (AIX native compiler) to compile the test cases, the entire test bucket does not run very smoothly. In fact it is a very cumbersome process. So the test failures would have been over looked by me. In future, I will stick to using GCC to compile the test cases to ensure a smoother execution of the test bucket. Joel, thanks for fixing the regression:) Applied the patch on my AIX machine and it does not cause any issues in 32/64 BIT. Regards, Raunaq M. Bathija