From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E113851C0C for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 18:53:55 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 96E113851C0C Received: from mail-wm1-f71.google.com (mail-wm1-f71.google.com [209.85.128.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-33-Q8q7aOXiOve1ZPHXl7PUWQ-1; Tue, 26 May 2020 14:53:53 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Q8q7aOXiOve1ZPHXl7PUWQ-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f71.google.com with SMTP id u15so208753wmm.5 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:53:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=EV0K7D+e9ypVCv+45Zec3+8jdPz8ra9z5XNg5zEvODU=; b=Hh2ng9OwwjVeZHJcpTKw0H3wuNjIvZurndCWTeCIx41F4VDYs1i+oNKhL2iSmZIWkN 56GK/F0NxRaj+ELCSuW85GB4IczHA6mpOcU9XbphyshEo8r9NSxXH8CZN8DI9zLClddc JsNOlkLQzrnXFXObFF6Xi7TTAG912ssV52l4MEAENz7JPe3XfCt7qYm6YJTRPTxSrPd7 6NOyDfRgB5e29UUWUrW9mUhPQ5vivQbGfzELfDTfvGv4ZSfLFHRKh+/hkDiMRedk9Rsf hVA71ah3gOFmKircpwYZlaGEYHY7cTlDVe3u3xZsnReBoCRXEfGALFq7X1GJjGWZfFj9 wyPw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532KtZDig0O3ec8rZDfagQaFrzcO8w/lkm+DZaX2NMjEKyfUnLq+ uHHMkXADkoL07T1iwlqtjh5NekeDIBie+COKIAKFw0YKln92UVvgpFz3UIXplpTqpPvjKYhouFb vuc49p7cmMKTev4HXhtDpTw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6b83:: with SMTP id n3mr5977295wrx.395.1590519232364; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:53:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxIdIHYDDYiZPN4ajl0iB8vY8xnhvI2HYffJVlRYh8Emt5SjAwz2p+YnBRQ8hOB7RB1U57Hzw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6b83:: with SMTP id n3mr5977288wrx.395.1590519232161; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:53:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:8a0:f909:7b00:56ee:75ff:fe8d:232b? ([2001:8a0:f909:7b00:56ee:75ff:fe8d:232b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s15sm608727wro.80.2020.05.26.11.53.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 26 May 2020 11:53:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH,v2 testsuite] Fix some duplicate test names To: Luis Machado , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20200526141848.22771-1-luis.machado@linaro.org> <20200526173925.30491-1-luis.machado@linaro.org> <1021975e-b67f-5e04-4469-2640c27add81@redhat.com> <6821561e-b6a5-1260-d8a5-d45779fd5c15@linaro.org> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 19:53:50 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6821561e-b6a5-1260-d8a5-d45779fd5c15@linaro.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, BODY_8BITS, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 18:53:57 -0000 On 5/26/20 7:42 PM, Luis Machado wrote: > On 5/26/20 2:50 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> Hi, spotted a couple more issues: >> >> On 5/26/20 6:39 PM, Luis Machado wrote: >>>       gdb_test_multiple "$test" "$test" { >>>       -re "Breakpoint (\[0-9\]*) at .*$where.*$gdb_prompt $" { >>>           set bp $expect_out(1,string) >>> -        pass "$test" >>> +        pass "$test inserted as number $bp" >> >> Same issue with FAIL vs PASS messages.  This needs to be: >> >>   -     gdb_test_multiple "$test" "$test" { >>   +     gdb_test_multiple "$test" "$test inserted as number $bp" { >>        -re "Breakpoint (\[0-9\]*) at .*$where.*$gdb_prompt $" { >>            set bp $expect_out(1,string) >>   -        pass "$test" >>   +        pass $gdb_test_name >> >> > > This one has a small problem. $bp gets calculated after parsing the output. We may have to pass a param to proc so we can differentiate between calls. > Oh, I didn't even notice that it's the breakpoint number that you were printing. That doesn't seem very stable, like it could be different on different boards. Seems best to avoid using that in the test name, regardless. > For example, we attempt to add four breakpoints at "main" later in the test. > > We may have to add some prefixes to callers of this proc. Sounds good. Thanks, Pedro Alves