On 10/31/22 08:14, Luis Machado wrote:
> Hi Maciej,
> 
> On 10/29/22 14:52, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>> Hi Luis,
>>
>>> I'm seeing a number of new failures on armhf Ubuntu 20.04 for both
>>> gdb.python/py-format-address.exp and gdb.python/py-parameter.exp.
>>>
>>> Since this series touched those, I'm wondering if those are known.
>>>
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-format-address.exp: symbol_filename=off:
>>> gdb.format_address, result should have an offset
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-format-address.exp: symbol_filename=on:
>>> gdb.format_address, result should have an offset
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test default value
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test default value via gdb.parameter
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test set to 0
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test set to 1
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test set to 5
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of -1
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of -1 via gdb.parameter
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of -5 via gdb.parameter
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of 0 via gdb.parameter
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of 1
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of 1 via gdb.parameter
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of 5 via gdb.parameter
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of None
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: test value of None via gdb.parameter
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: {test set to -1}
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: {test set to -5}
>>> FAIL: gdb.python/py-parameter.exp: test_integer_parameter:
>>> kind=PARAM_UINTEGER: {test set to None}
>>
>>   I haven't gone through all of them in detail, but based on my contents
>> of gdb.log the first three are surely not related.  Please post the full
>> gdb.log contents for these failures or run `git bisect' on GDB to track
>> down the likely offender.
> 
> No worries. Let me do some bisecting to find out more. I thought I'd check in
> case these were known.
> 
> Thanks,
> Luis

A bisect confirmed commit e7e1f2034567207e5e01cb75ea2ffd568a64e84d changed the gdb.python/py-parameter.exp behavior from PASS to FAIL. gdb.python/py-format.exp was failing before.

I've attached the relevant gdb.log and gdb.sum.

I don't fully understand the issue here, so I can't be sure this is a real regression or something that was broken before but this patch just happened to uncover it.

Do let me know if you need some more info.

Regards,
Luis