From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 33976 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2016 01:00:41 -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 32389 invoked by uid 89); 2 Sep 2016 01:00:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=act X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 01:00:39 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DDC51079F; Fri, 2 Sep 2016 01:00:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u8210bAb022532; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 21:00:37 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC] Set process affinity in test to work around ARM ptrace bug To: Yao Qi References: <1467295036-2816-1-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <86a8hxzni8.fsf@gmail.com> <86vayfbrrf.fsf@gmail.com> Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 01:00:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <86vayfbrrf.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-09/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2 On 09/01/2016 03:48 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > Pedro Alves writes: > >> But since this is only for when running the testsuite alone, I could argue that >> this masks the problem and thus makes it look like gdb works better on an >> affected system than it really does. I think if I were working on gdb/gdbserver >> on arm, I'd much prefer if gdb told me my system had a broken ptrace, so I >> could act on it, rather than masking it off and pretend all is well. >> How about we make gdb / gdbserver detect bad kernel version, and output a >> warning to the effect? We already have precedent in >> nat/linux-ptrace.c. > > Do you mean linux_ptrace_test_ret_to_nx_instr? Yes. > >> I think we should probably do that regardless of any testsuite workaround. >> > > Yes, I agree. I'll write a test in nat/linux-ptrace.c too. > > I happen to see there is a proc gdb_skip_float_test, so I write a patch > to detect broken kernel ptrace in it, and use gdb_skip_float_test all > over the test cases. How about the patch below? I like it. This version LGTM. Thanks for adjusting. -- Pedro Alves