Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Rewrite catch-follow-exec.exp

[Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 484 bytes --]

On 10/23/18 11:05 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 10/23/18 11:04 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
>> On 2018-10-15 3:54 p.m., Tom de Vries wrote:
>>>> Just wondering.  Would it make life easier if we fixed PR 23368, which
>>>> is the reason we have to do the test in an unnatural way?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>
>> Hi Tom,
>>
>> PR 23368 should be fixed now.  Do you plan on updating catch-follow-exec.exp
>> to be written in a more standard way?
> 
> Sure, will do.

How does this look?

Thanks,
- Tom


[-- Attachment #2: 0001-gdb-testsuite-Rewrite-catch-follow-exec.exp-using-gdb_test.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 3071 bytes --]

[gdb/testsuite]	Rewrite catch-follow-exec.exp using gdb_test

The testcase catch-follow-exec.exp is written use gdb -batch in order to avoid
a GDB SIGTTOU.  After the commit of "Avoid GDB SIGTTOU on catch exec + set
follow-exec-mode new (PR 23368)", that no longer is necessary.

Rewrite the test using regular gdb_test commands.

Tested with x86_64-linux.

2018-10-24  Tom de Vries  <tdevries@suse.de>

	* gdb.base/catch-follow-exec.exp: Rewrite using gdb_test.

---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-follow-exec.exp | 64 +++++++++-------------------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-follow-exec.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-follow-exec.exp
index c3c7c7ecdd..25d14b8465 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-follow-exec.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-follow-exec.exp
@@ -18,66 +18,40 @@
 
 standard_testfile
 
-if { [target_info gdb_protocol] != "" } {
-    # Even though the feature under features being tested are supported by
-    # gdbserver, the way this test is written doesn't make it easy with a
-    # remote target.
-    unsupported "not native"
-    return
-}
-
 if { ![remote_file target exists /bin/ls] } {
     unsupported "no ls"
     return
 }
 
-if { [build_executable "failed to prepare" $testfile $srcfile debug] == -1 } {
-    return -1
+if { [prepare_for_testing "failed to prepare" $testfile $srcfile debug] } {
+    return
 }
 
 proc catch_follow_exec { } {
-    global binfile
-    global gdb_spawn_id
+    global gdb_prompt gdb_spawn_id
 
-    set test "catch-follow-exec"
+    gdb_test "catch exec" \
+	{Catchpoint [0-9][0-9]* \(exec\)} \
+	"catch exec"
 
-    append FLAGS " \"$binfile\""
-    append FLAGS " -batch"
-    append FLAGS " -ex \"catch exec\""
-    append FLAGS " -ex \"set follow-exec-mode new\""
-    append FLAGS " -ex \"run\""
-    append FLAGS " -ex \"info prog\""
+    gdb_test "set follow-exec-mode new" \
+	"" \
+	"set follow-exec-mode new"
 
-    gdb_exit
-    if {[gdb_spawn_with_cmdline_opts "$FLAGS"] != 0} {
-	fail "spawn"
-	return
+    gdb_run_cmd
+    gdb_expect {
+        -re ".*hit Catchpoint.*${gdb_prompt} $" {
+	    pass "run"
+        }
     }
 
-    gdb_test_multiple "" "run til exit" {
-	"runtime error:" {
-	    # Error in case of --enable-ubsan
-	    fail "no runtime error"
+    gdb_test_multiple "info prog" "info prog" {
+	-i "$gdb_spawn_id" eof {
+	    fail "info prog"
 	}
-	eof {
-	    set result [wait -i $gdb_spawn_id]
-	    verbose $result
-
-	    gdb_assert { [lindex $result 2] == 0 }
-
-	    # We suspect this will be zero instead of one after fixing PR23368
-	    # - "gdb goes to into background when hitting exec catchpoint with
-	    # follow-exec-mode new"
-	    gdb_assert { [lindex $result 3] != 0 }
-
-	    # Error in case of --disable-ubsan, we get
-	    # "CHILDKILLED SIGSEGV {segmentation violation}" as extra
-	    # argument(s).
-	    gdb_assert { [llength $result] == 4 }
+	-i "$gdb_spawn_id" "No selected thread\."  {
+	    pass "info prog"
 	}
-
-	remote_close host
-	clear_gdb_spawn_id
     }
 }