From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 121583858D20 for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 11:06:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 121583858D20 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1667560018; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=shMm7izGj1ZtMq+VajKUKJ6AsFhOEap69/IXoJi2gXw=; b=alZjGUknn8Yp+VsK0S5eI8z4XKUmP4qJUBXI28MyabGnKlkpkevXxKnGwNGd/LHs56c/Tf PLxFd7CGYSps4dz9lekcH7ztUmEPOHvn6pXKeXRK4MS3D6bqKkOpoK35n+kiOKzRTN0HUr 76go4/DjpcGnZajXw7zU9/+T82LuK3I= Received: from mail-wm1-f70.google.com (mail-wm1-f70.google.com [209.85.128.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-402-Hl57nbqBNwWzRGW9SHka6Q-1; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 07:06:57 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Hl57nbqBNwWzRGW9SHka6Q-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f70.google.com with SMTP id c5-20020a1c3505000000b003c56da8e894so4100867wma.0 for ; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 04:06:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=shMm7izGj1ZtMq+VajKUKJ6AsFhOEap69/IXoJi2gXw=; b=m1BfzNS2zghmnhLUd97GblHtieisdt1Wm9A2K0VRYYtdhz7cb8lcKa3mQ3wmBht6re AtysOJb1mxGoofYoItStyWGi6TV1Nay64pa9TSZ93YpG00KSlB1PBmdj2/Z2KBHl1flp NNe7FLA5wLDCJzgfMlXZhySg/oWLKN3lvuAwhWQ068CfmOjVHU1vFcbJ/0CzrGISHBq3 NANDulj4+6evcGWlpFFjn4pVtXsBPh8E7hJU75XqTh+VKdi46yM9OoThJSGHl6o41Wmh 07GWSejJiS+siW6fq1C1QYdekItp9fPerEjMTxGGRitZFN2XK+ONQ/NAgH4ODYSi8HYF CE1w== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0IXNifJDi0Y9kSP8gQAZ+w/jAGxCqOJMirKcMseBGjXdJSTyQU TpoO9gwVuJko9ou4A0mk52REWX7Xy4tuyXMGhKjyDrYCQncc+o32qawZomLLdAKY5OJShLEtmx+ HdBafQBJGu0OpHTCmLxgZ4A== X-Received: by 2002:adf:dd91:0:b0:236:a261:6930 with SMTP id x17-20020adfdd91000000b00236a2616930mr21685028wrl.551.1667560016161; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 04:06:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4o18AvxuCzjnkeOj4Cf40DlPcVoebV/KVR4kfRuk4m9rl3nPB7GvknXLV4L01anYGXOh05yg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:dd91:0:b0:236:a261:6930 with SMTP id x17-20020adfdd91000000b00236a2616930mr21684993wrl.551.1667560015698; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 04:06:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.45] (ip-62-245-66-121.bb.vodafone.cz. [62.245.66.121]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t20-20020a05600c199400b003cf9bf5208esm614208wmq.19.2022.11.04.04.06.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Nov 2022 04:06:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 12:06:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.0 Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] gdb/testsuite: add KFAILs to gdb.reverse/step-reverse.exp To: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1d743da0-278c-f800-10a0-d6aaa7995a92@simark.ca> <20221103090836.320197-1-blarsen@redhat.com> <717de14c-8b25-6691-5c0a-0b779997b742@redhat.com> From: Bruno Larsen In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,BODY_8BITS,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,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 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 thanks, pushed! Cheers, Bruno > > Simon >