From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4E783858CDB for ; Thu, 4 May 2023 14:52:32 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org D4E783858CDB Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=us.ibm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=us.ibm.com Received: from pps.filterd (m0353724.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 344EdoV1030202; Thu, 4 May 2023 14:52:18 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : from : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version : subject; s=pp1; bh=3tmGs63rBPpz++R8/U6wTBiPpXPCOcFPJ1NmPDsSXn0=; b=Yhh4ii25Psgc88QnV8jWC59L2ShO6wWP7mZN9HcCMN2YXWKfvrgBu4rHjz2Uqy6EKAmj RLJpVE8dtz+zQ2vNTxagW1osdBGfvYvH2MkZm/vNZnCRqBEbgecIQZApgEGfzySfNkZq AWcp18bvPkU2/4U4m33hF8fcZPp7iVIbHKvhoi7aGzRBdSXmxpnrK38a0H4gxQZJmD/r Sh7oSFKSzTrgOy/p4MnbBVOVPJn0LFp1GIgBuNllNf3OlMIAgTrc5/Fts1dJkeJ0u8bf yGDBMGoRZaRrALIlGJNzscKbuUwnNlnKtnx+XhLMy8OrrOBQTrQB8wi/1czfqLv9MiLG 0g== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3qcbgheyww-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 04 May 2023 14:52:16 +0000 Received: from m0353724.ppops.net (m0353724.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 344Eea2b002426; Thu, 4 May 2023 14:52:16 GMT Received: from ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (ba.79.3fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.63.121.186]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3qcbgheywk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 04 May 2023 14:52:16 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 344CKfns025466; Thu, 4 May 2023 14:52:15 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com ([9.208.130.97]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3q8tv7t2ur-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 04 May 2023 14:52:15 +0000 Received: from smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.101]) by smtprelay02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 344EqDOH13435558 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 4 May 2023 14:52:14 GMT Received: from smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50755805C; Thu, 4 May 2023 14:52:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7229258062; Thu, 4 May 2023 14:52:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-e362e14c-2378-11b2-a85c-87d605f3c641.ibm.com (unknown [9.163.52.55]) by smtpav02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 4 May 2023 14:52:13 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: From: Carl Love To: Bruno Larsen , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand , pedro@palves.net Cc: luis.machado@arm.com, cel@us.ibm.com Date: Thu, 04 May 2023 07:52:13 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <74630f1ccb6e9258ae60682105ee5490726fb255.camel@us.ibm.com> <46d73c69-9168-44c6-b515-23dd893fc0eb@redhat.com> <7c596ccfc69b237a6094ead018f4a0b38b82a632.camel@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-18.el8) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: BPcTf44djCLPSjIybpgfN45DZEFVjTW2 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: MqGO7GUi4X7duyri3vY2gxlaFDIPrpAy Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 1 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix reverse stepping multiple contiguous PC ranges over the line table. X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.254,Aquarius:18.0.942,Hydra:6.0.573,FMLib:17.11.170.22 definitions=2023-05-04_10,2023-05-04_01,2023-02-09_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=917 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2303200000 definitions=main-2305040119 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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: Bruno: On Thu, 2023-05-04 at 11:24 +0200, Bruno Larsen wrote: > On 04/05/2023 04:55, Carl Love wrote: > > Bruno: > > > > On Wed, 2023-05-03 at 11:53 +0200, Bruno Larsen wrote: > > > On 27/04/2023 22:59, Carl Love wrote: > > > > > > > + > > > > +# This test uses the gcc no-column-info command. > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the other test > > > is a > > > more generic version of this one, so this test could check for a > > > gcc > > > recent enough to support this feature, instead of just > > > generically > > > gcc. > > > That said, gcc added it on version > > > 7( > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=0029b929c9719a > > > ), is it > > > old enough that we don't care? > > GCC supports line tables, I don't know that clang or other > > compilers > > do. So all we really need is to check for gcc. The line table > > stuff > > was added a long time ago so not sure that we really need to check > > for > > version 7 at this point. So just checked that we are using > > gcc. The > > "other test" func-map-to-same-line.exp expects the line table so it > > should probably also be checking that we are using gcc. > > GCC 7.1 (first gcc 7 release) was on May 2nd 2017, almost exactly 6 > years ago, and there was a gcc 6.8 release in october 2018. I don't > know > if 5 years is long enough to assume that everyone has abandoned the > old > version (especially seeing as we sometimes test for gcc 4 or 3, but > that > might just be old cruft). That said, it's not a blocker for me, so > /shrug OK, I would think that it has been there long enough. But it does sound like there is the occasional test on an old gcc. So, OK lets restrict it to GCC 7 and later. > > Also, clang will have line tables - otherwise almost nothing on our > test > suite would work. It doesn't have column info, though, which is why > I'm > fine with it being ignored in the test that uses -gno-column-info. > > > > > +if ![is_c_compiler_gcc] { > > > > + unsupported "gcc is required for this test" > > > > + return 0 > > > > +} > > > > + > > > > > From my understanding, you could have architectures or inferiors > that > support reverse execution without needing to record, that's why > "supports_reverse" and "supports_process_record" are different. > > However, if you want to restrict this to record-only, that's fine, I > just think it should be a requirement at the top of the test, not in > the > middle of the execution. I can't imagine how you can do remote execution without recording but if they can do that OK. The test really should be at the top, missed that part. So, I will change this to "supports_reverse" and get it at the top where it belongs. Thanks for the clarification and help with this. Carl