From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 80283 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2018 19:21:44 -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 79981 invoked by uid 89); 9 Apr 2018 19:21:44 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:21:42 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DD33722C3; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 19:21:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED70F20BC8C7; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 19:21:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Defer breakpoint reset when cloning progspace for fork child To: Simon Marchi References: <20180330190132.20823-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <790ab9233396d15d8227212fb3e33993@polymtl.ca> <399a5e0a-ce06-ace9-913c-e71aa2f15fe4@redhat.com> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:21:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2018-04/txt/msg00163.txt.bz2 On 04/09/2018 08:09 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2018-04-07 14:43, Pedro Alves wrote: >> I'm not sure I agree with no test, though.  I think a simple test >> that tries both pie and not-pie would be useful, because >> defaults vary depending on distro/system and they change over >> time -- having a smoke test like the one described above covering both >> pie and non-pie ensures no developer or testing environment where pie >> might be relevant ever misses the problem in the future. > > Doing this means we'll need to update tests on an individual basis to test pie and non-pie.  In order to be able to run all tests with pie executables (even on machines where it isn't the default), wouldn't it be better to have a target board for it, like we have dwarf4-gdb-index.exp, fission.exp and fission-dwp.exp? While a board file as a new test more may be useful, I think there's value in having smoke tests that run with the default board too. Just like we have other tests in the tree that exercise basic PIE, gdb index, fission, etc. already. E.g., we test PIE+exec in gdb.base/pie-execl.exp. I was not saying to update the existing fork tests, but instead to add the small test that you described in the commit log as a testcase. Let me put it another way -- I suspect that if you had discovered this issue on a system with a compiler that does _not_ emit PIE by default, you'd have likely considered adding a small test. Thanks, Pedro Alves