Re: [PATCHv2] gdb/testsuite: add KFAILs to gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp

[Bruno Larsen <blarsen@redhat.com>]

On 03/11/2022 17:59, Simon Marchi wrote:
>
> On 11/3/22 10:30, Bruno Larsen wrote:
>> On 03/11/2022 14:06, Simon Marchi wrote:
>>> On 11/3/22 05:08, Bruno Larsen wrote:
>>>>> I don't know the reverse stuff well, but the explanation makes sense.
>>>>> Do you plan on tackling this bug?  If not, can you file a bug and add a
>>>>> kfail?
>>>> Sure, I do plan on tackling this at some point, but I don't know when
>>>> that will be, so I filed the bug, and this is the patch to add the
>>>> KFAILs, thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Recent changes to gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp revealed the latent bug
>>>> PR record/29745, where we can't skip one funcion forward if we're using
>>>> native-gdbserver. This commit just adds kfails to the test.
>>>>
>>>> Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29745
>>>> ---
>>>>    gdb/testsuite/gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>>>    1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp
>>>> index c28e1f6db4f..37e80a7d337 100644
>>>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp
>>>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp
>>>> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ if { [prepare_for_testing "failed to prepare" $testfile $srcfile] } {
>>>>    }
>>>>      runto_main
>>>> +set using_gdbserver [target_is_gdbserver]
>>>>      if [supports_process_record] {
>>>>        # Activate process record/replay
>>>> @@ -273,11 +274,25 @@ if { "$step_out" == 1 } {
>>>>    # Step forward over recursion again so we can test stepping over calls
>>>>    # inside the recursion itself.
>>>>    gdb_test_no_output "set exec-dir forward" "forward again to test recursion"
>>>> +if {$using_gdbserver} {
>>>> +    # gdbserver doesn't record the change of return pointer, so we can't
>>>> +    # next forward over functions.
>>>> +    setup_kfail gdb/29745 *-*-*
>>> There's one thing bugging me in your explanation: as far as I know,
>>> gdbserver does any recording, with the built-in GDB recorder (i.e. not
>>> btrace).  So we probably shouldn't say "gdbserver doesn't record", as
>>> it's not meant to record in the first place.  That would mean the
>>> problem is within GDB, when using the remote target.  And the check for
>>> the kfail should therefore use gdb_is_target_remote instead of
>>> target_is_gdbserver.
>> That makes sense. This is my first time working with gdbserver, so everything here is news to me.  Updated version:
>>
>> ---
>>
>>      Recent changes to gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp revealed the latent bug
>>      PR record/29745, where we can't skip one funcion forward if we're using
>>      native-gdbserver. This commit just adds kfails to the test.
>>
>>      Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29745
> Thanks:
>
> Approved-By: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com>

thanks, pushed!

Cheers,
Bruno

>
> Simon
>