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

[Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca>]

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.

Simon