From: Pedro Alves <pedro@palves.net>
To: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>,
Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>,
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: use gdb_test_multiple in gdb_breakpoint
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 19:56:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ecad691e-4f49-e216-ce6e-4f6b5d9fe21f@palves.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ba849cb2-ad0e-774e-0bec-5fa1404ec31a@polymtl.ca>
On 2023-01-10 3:50 p.m., Simon Marchi wrote:
>
>
> On 1/10/23 10:33, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 2023-01-05 4:28 p.m., Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote:
>>
>>> ---
>>> gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp | 6 ++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
>>> index e17eace4cb13..af538e5c8fbd 100644
>>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
>>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
>>> @@ -657,6 +657,12 @@ proc gdb_breakpoint { linespec args } {
>>> send_gdb "$pending_response\n"
>>> exp_continue
>>> }
>>> + -re "$gdb_prompt $" {
>>> + if { $print_fail } {
>>> + fail $test_name
>>> + }
>>> + return 0
>>> + }
>>> }
>>
>> The other removed "-re" cases also considered $print_fail, so if their replacement
>> inside gdb_test_multiple is hit, they'll produce a FAIL. Was that intended?
>> Should we instead add a "-nofail" option to gdb_test / gdb_test_multiple ?
>
> Good point, this is a change in behavior. Does this change cause you an
> unexpected FAIL in practice?
No, I was just trying to catch up on patches a bit, and read your patch and noticed
that issue. I was going to reply to the patch directly, but then saw the
follow up discussion and replied there (or rather, here).
> I was actually planning on removing that
> message / no-message option to gdb_breakpoint [1] to simplify it. I
> don't see any use for the current behavior, I'd rather have it log a
> test result all the time.
I've always found the message/no-message API confusing. It exists on
runto too, and maybe other procs.
I think the intention of not issuing PASS by default, was that you can
use gdb_breakpoint to implement other procedures inside lib/gdb.exp.
If gdb_breakpoint starts issuing a PASS, then an implementation detail
of such procedures starts being visible, by ending up with two PASSes for
each call of the procedure that happens to use gdb_breakpoint, one for
gdb_breakpoint, and one for the caller procedure proper.
I think it's the same reason many procedures in lib/gdb.exp were kept using
gdb_expect directly instead of being converted to gdb_test/gdb_test_multiple -- to
avoid the internal PASS/FAIL.
Pedro Alves
> I can kind of see when that would maybe be
> useful: if you wanted to set a breakpoint, and it could legitimately not
> work (you could do something with gdb_breakpoint's return value). But
> you could also use the break command directly, like many places do
> already, so it's not really needed. Anyway, all of this to say that I
> could fix what you pointed out by pruning / simplifying code rather than
> adding more.
>
> Simon
>
> [1] https://review.lttng.org/c/binutils-gdb/+/7158/6
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-10 19:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-03 19:22 Simon Marchi
2023-01-04 9:15 ` Lancelot SIX
2023-01-04 16:11 ` Simon Marchi
2023-01-04 16:18 ` Lancelot SIX
2023-01-04 16:22 ` Simon Marchi
2023-01-04 17:40 ` Lancelot SIX
2023-01-04 18:02 ` Lancelot SIX
2023-01-04 19:05 ` Simon Marchi
2023-01-04 19:12 ` Lancelot SIX
2023-01-05 9:04 ` Tom de Vries
2023-01-05 16:28 ` Simon Marchi
2023-01-05 16:31 ` Tom de Vries
2023-01-05 16:36 ` Simon Marchi
2023-01-10 15:33 ` Pedro Alves
2023-01-10 15:50 ` Simon Marchi
2023-01-10 19:56 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2023-01-10 20:42 ` Simon Marchi
2023-01-11 19:05 ` Pedro Alves
2023-01-11 19:42 ` Simon Marchi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ecad691e-4f49-e216-ce6e-4f6b5d9fe21f@palves.net \
--to=pedro@palves.net \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
--cc=tdevries@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).