* [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation
@ 2023-11-30 9:54 Rainer Orth
2023-11-30 16:29 ` Simon Marchi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Rainer Orth @ 2023-11-30 9:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Simon Marchi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1292 bytes --]
procfs.c doesn't currently compile on Solaris:
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/dist/gdb/procfs.c: In member function ‘virtual int procfs_target::can_use_hw_breakpoint(bptype, int, int)’:
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/dist/gdb/procfs.c:3017:9: error: ‘ptr_type’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘var_types’?
3017 | type *ptr_type
| ^~~~~~~~
| var_types
This was caused by this patch:
commit 99d9c3b92ca96a7425cbb6b1bf453ede9477a2ee
Author: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com>
Date: Fri Sep 29 14:24:38 2023 -0400
gdb: remove target_gdbarch
Partially undoing it restores the build.
Tested on amd64-pc-solaris2.11, committed to master.
Btw., I'd considered reviving the Solaris buildbots to guard against
this kind of issues. However, they'd both (sparcv9 and amd64) would
need to be build-only: the make check phase takes 3-5 times as long as
the build, there are about 2500 failures and quite a number of those are
flakey. I have no idea if the new buildmaster allows for such a
compile-only configuration, though (the previous one did).
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: procfs.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 464 bytes --]
diff --git a/gdb/procfs.c b/gdb/procfs.c
--- a/gdb/procfs.c
+++ b/gdb/procfs.c
@@ -3014,7 +3014,7 @@ procfs_target::can_use_hw_breakpoint (en
procfs_address_to_host_pointer will reveal that an internal error
will be generated when the host and target pointer sizes are
different. */
- type *ptr_type
+ struct type *ptr_type
= builtin_type (current_inferior ()->arch ())->builtin_data_ptr;
if (sizeof (void *) != ptr_type->length ())
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation
2023-11-30 9:54 [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation Rainer Orth
@ 2023-11-30 16:29 ` Simon Marchi
2023-12-01 10:09 ` Rainer Orth
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Simon Marchi @ 2023-11-30 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rainer Orth, gdb-patches; +Cc: Simon Marchi, Mark Wielaard
On 11/30/23 04:54, Rainer Orth wrote:
> procfs.c doesn't currently compile on Solaris:
>
> /vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/dist/gdb/procfs.c: In member function ‘virtual int procfs_target::can_use_hw_breakpoint(bptype, int, int)’:
> /vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/dist/gdb/procfs.c:3017:9: error: ‘ptr_type’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘var_types’?
> 3017 | type *ptr_type
> | ^~~~~~~~
> | var_types
>
> This was caused by this patch:
>
> commit 99d9c3b92ca96a7425cbb6b1bf453ede9477a2ee
> Author: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com>
> Date: Fri Sep 29 14:24:38 2023 -0400
>
> gdb: remove target_gdbarch
>
> Partially undoing it restores the build.
>
> Tested on amd64-pc-solaris2.11, committed to master.
>
> Btw., I'd considered reviving the Solaris buildbots to guard against
> this kind of issues. However, they'd both (sparcv9 and amd64) would
> need to be build-only: the make check phase takes 3-5 times as long as
> the build, there are about 2500 failures and quite a number of those are
> flakey. I have no idea if the new buildmaster allows for such a
> compile-only configuration, though (the previous one did).
>
> Rainer
Thanks for catching and fixing this.
Having build-only builders would already be really great, I'm pretty
sure it's possible (CCing Mark Wielaard).
If you can identify a few simple and stable tests, it's possible to run
just those (I think that's what the buildbot does even for Linux/x86
today). It would at least help ensure that GDB is not completely
broken.
Simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation
2023-11-30 16:29 ` Simon Marchi
@ 2023-12-01 10:09 ` Rainer Orth
2023-12-10 23:07 ` Mark Wielaard
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Rainer Orth @ 2023-12-01 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Simon Marchi; +Cc: gdb-patches, Simon Marchi, Mark Wielaard
Hi Simon,
>> Btw., I'd considered reviving the Solaris buildbots to guard against
>> this kind of issues. However, they'd both (sparcv9 and amd64) would
>> need to be build-only: the make check phase takes 3-5 times as long as
>> the build, there are about 2500 failures and quite a number of those are
>> flakey. I have no idea if the new buildmaster allows for such a
>> compile-only configuration, though (the previous one did).
> Having build-only builders would already be really great, I'm pretty
> sure it's possible (CCing Mark Wielaard).
I think I checked when the new buildmaster went first online, but
couldn't find anything at the time. I've now rechecked the new config
and indeed there are quite a number of build-only configs in use.
> If you can identify a few simple and stable tests, it's possible to run
> just those (I think that's what the buildbot does even for Linux/x86
> today). It would at least help ensure that GDB is not completely
> broken.
Seems like a good compromise between a pure build-only config and one
that runs the full testsuite, but drowns us in noise from timeouts and
flakiness. I'll have a look.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation
2023-12-01 10:09 ` Rainer Orth
@ 2023-12-10 23:07 ` Mark Wielaard
2023-12-11 14:40 ` Rainer Orth
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mark Wielaard @ 2023-12-10 23:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rainer Orth; +Cc: Simon Marchi, gdb-patches, Simon Marchi
Hi Rainer,
On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 11:09:36AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> >> Btw., I'd considered reviving the Solaris buildbots to guard against
> >> this kind of issues. However, they'd both (sparcv9 and amd64) would
> >> need to be build-only: the make check phase takes 3-5 times as long as
> >> the build, there are about 2500 failures and quite a number of those are
> >> flakey. I have no idea if the new buildmaster allows for such a
> >> compile-only configuration, though (the previous one did).
>
> > Having build-only builders would already be really great, I'm pretty
> > sure it's possible (CCing Mark Wielaard).
>
> I think I checked when the new buildmaster went first online, but
> couldn't find anything at the time. I've now rechecked the new config
> and indeed there are quite a number of build-only configs in use.
We do have workers for different architectures, but they are all
GNU/Linux. If you have a Solaris worker that can be used then please
contact https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/buildbot
> > If you can identify a few simple and stable tests, it's possible to run
> > just those (I think that's what the buildbot does even for Linux/x86
> > today). It would at least help ensure that GDB is not completely
> > broken.
>
> Seems like a good compromise between a pure build-only config and one
> that runs the full testsuite, but drowns us in noise from timeouts and
> flakiness. I'll have a look.
Currently the list of tests run for gdb is fairly small, but they are
all must succeed tests (they are run under native, gdbserver and
extended-gdbserver):
https://sourceware.org/cgit/builder/tree/builder/master.cfg#n2883
Cheers,
Mark
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation
2023-12-10 23:07 ` Mark Wielaard
@ 2023-12-11 14:40 ` Rainer Orth
2023-12-12 9:40 ` Mark Wielaard
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Rainer Orth @ 2023-12-11 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Wielaard; +Cc: Simon Marchi, gdb-patches, Simon Marchi
Hi Mark,
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 11:09:36AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> >> Btw., I'd considered reviving the Solaris buildbots to guard against
>> >> this kind of issues. However, they'd both (sparcv9 and amd64) would
>> >> need to be build-only: the make check phase takes 3-5 times as long as
>> >> the build, there are about 2500 failures and quite a number of those are
>> >> flakey. I have no idea if the new buildmaster allows for such a
>> >> compile-only configuration, though (the previous one did).
>>
>> > Having build-only builders would already be really great, I'm pretty
>> > sure it's possible (CCing Mark Wielaard).
>>
>> I think I checked when the new buildmaster went first online, but
>> couldn't find anything at the time. I've now rechecked the new config
>> and indeed there are quite a number of build-only configs in use.
>
> We do have workers for different architectures, but they are all
> GNU/Linux. If you have a Solaris worker that can be used then please
> contact https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/buildbot
I do: both systems (Solaris 11.4/SPARC and Solaris 11.4/amd64) used to
run compile-only buildbots with the previous buildmaster.
They are currently used for LLVM (sparcv9, amd64) and Golang (amd64)
buildbots, but have some free capacity.
>> > If you can identify a few simple and stable tests, it's possible to run
>> > just those (I think that's what the buildbot does even for Linux/x86
>> > today). It would at least help ensure that GDB is not completely
>> > broken.
>>
>> Seems like a good compromise between a pure build-only config and one
>> that runs the full testsuite, but drowns us in noise from timeouts and
>> flakiness. I'll have a look.
>
> Currently the list of tests run for gdb is fairly small, but they are
> all must succeed tests (they are run under native, gdbserver and
> extended-gdbserver):
> https://sourceware.org/cgit/builder/tree/builder/master.cfg#n2883
I'll check if those work reliably. In the worst case, the Solaris bots
would have to become compile-only, so at least guarding against build
failures. However, I'm uncertain about gdbserver: I don't even know if
it compiles on Solaris, let alone does anything useful.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation
2023-12-11 14:40 ` Rainer Orth
@ 2023-12-12 9:40 ` Mark Wielaard
2023-12-13 9:15 ` Rainer Orth
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mark Wielaard @ 2023-12-12 9:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rainer Orth; +Cc: Simon Marchi, gdb-patches, Simon Marchi
Hi Rainer,
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 03:40:20PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 11:09:36AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> >> >> Btw., I'd considered reviving the Solaris buildbots to guard against
> >> >> this kind of issues. However, they'd both (sparcv9 and amd64) would
> >> >> need to be build-only: the make check phase takes 3-5 times as long as
> >> >> the build, there are about 2500 failures and quite a number of those are
> >> >> flakey. I have no idea if the new buildmaster allows for such a
> >> >> compile-only configuration, though (the previous one did).
> >>
> >> > Having build-only builders would already be really great, I'm pretty
> >> > sure it's possible (CCing Mark Wielaard).
> >>
> >> I think I checked when the new buildmaster went first online, but
> >> couldn't find anything at the time. I've now rechecked the new config
> >> and indeed there are quite a number of build-only configs in use.
> >
> > We do have workers for different architectures, but they are all
> > GNU/Linux. If you have a Solaris worker that can be used then please
> > contact https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/buildbot
>
> I do: both systems (Solaris 11.4/SPARC and Solaris 11.4/amd64) used to
> run compile-only buildbots with the previous buildmaster.
>
> They are currently used for LLVM (sparcv9, amd64) and Golang (amd64)
> buildbots, but have some free capacity.
Lets discuss on the buildbot mailinglist how we can hook those up if
you want to.
> >> > If you can identify a few simple and stable tests, it's possible to run
> >> > just those (I think that's what the buildbot does even for Linux/x86
> >> > today). It would at least help ensure that GDB is not completely
> >> > broken.
> >>
> >> Seems like a good compromise between a pure build-only config and one
> >> that runs the full testsuite, but drowns us in noise from timeouts and
> >> flakiness. I'll have a look.
> >
> > Currently the list of tests run for gdb is fairly small, but they are
> > all must succeed tests (they are run under native, gdbserver and
> > extended-gdbserver):
> > https://sourceware.org/cgit/builder/tree/builder/master.cfg#n2883
>
> I'll check if those work reliably. In the worst case, the Solaris bots
> would have to become compile-only, so at least guarding against build
> failures. However, I'm uncertain about gdbserver: I don't even know if
> it compiles on Solaris, let alone does anything useful.
We can be very flexible in what we build/test. It doesn't need to be
the same set of tests, we can remove gdbserver build/tests for
Solaris, etc. We can do builds on every commit, collapse builds for
the last set of commit or just once a day.
Cheers,
Mark
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation
2023-12-12 9:40 ` Mark Wielaard
@ 2023-12-13 9:15 ` Rainer Orth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Rainer Orth @ 2023-12-13 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Wielaard; +Cc: Simon Marchi, gdb-patches, Simon Marchi
Hi Mark,
>> > We do have workers for different architectures, but they are all
>> > GNU/Linux. If you have a Solaris worker that can be used then please
>> > contact https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/buildbot
>>
>> I do: both systems (Solaris 11.4/SPARC and Solaris 11.4/amd64) used to
>> run compile-only buildbots with the previous buildmaster.
>>
>> They are currently used for LLVM (sparcv9, amd64) and Golang (amd64)
>> buildbots, but have some free capacity.
>
> Lets discuss on the buildbot mailinglist how we can hook those up if
> you want to.
certainly. Being pretty busy right now, I'll most like have to postpone
this to early next year.
>> >> > If you can identify a few simple and stable tests, it's possible to run
>> >> > just those (I think that's what the buildbot does even for Linux/x86
>> >> > today). It would at least help ensure that GDB is not completely
>> >> > broken.
>> >>
>> >> Seems like a good compromise between a pure build-only config and one
>> >> that runs the full testsuite, but drowns us in noise from timeouts and
>> >> flakiness. I'll have a look.
>> >
>> > Currently the list of tests run for gdb is fairly small, but they are
>> > all must succeed tests (they are run under native, gdbserver and
>> > extended-gdbserver):
>> > https://sourceware.org/cgit/builder/tree/builder/master.cfg#n2883
>>
>> I'll check if those work reliably. In the worst case, the Solaris bots
>> would have to become compile-only, so at least guarding against build
>> failures. However, I'm uncertain about gdbserver: I don't even know if
>> it compiles on Solaris, let alone does anything useful.
>
> We can be very flexible in what we build/test. It doesn't need to be
> the same set of tests, we can remove gdbserver build/tests for
> Solaris, etc. We can do builds on every commit, collapse builds for
> the last set of commit or just once a day.
Excellent: so we can easily tune the worker to the machine's capacity.
I've meanwhile checked that set of gdb tests: most of them seem to PASS
reliably on Solaris, while a few FAIL while they should really be
UNSUPPORTED. As I suspected, gdbserver never has been ported to
Solaris, so that set of tests will have to be omitted.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation
@ 2022-03-31 8:40 Rainer Orth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Rainer Orth @ 2022-03-31 8:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1040 bytes --]
procfs.c doesn't compile on Solaris:
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/local/gdb/procfs.c: In member function ‘virtual bool procfs_target::info_proc(const char*, info_proc_what)’:
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/local/gdb/procfs.c:3302:3: error: ‘gdb_argv’ was not declared in this scope
3302 | gdb_argv built_argv (args);
| ^~~~~~~~
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/local/gdb/procfs.c:3303:20: error: ‘built_argv’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘buildargv’?
3303 | for (char *arg : built_argv)
| ^~~~~~~~~~
| buildargv
Fixed by including "gdbsupport/buildargv.h".
Tested on amd64-pc-solaris2.11, sparcv9-sun-solaris2.11.
Installed on master and gdb-12 branch to unbreak the build.
On master, with -Werror enabled, there's more, but I'm still
investigating how to handle that.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: pc.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 350 bytes --]
diff --git a/gdb/procfs.c b/gdb/procfs.c
--- a/gdb/procfs.c
+++ b/gdb/procfs.c
@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
#include "observable.h"
#include "gdbsupport/scoped_fd.h"
#include "gdbsupport/pathstuff.h"
+#include "gdbsupport/buildargv.h"
/* This module provides the interface between GDB and the
/proc file system, which is used on many versions of Unix
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-12-13 9:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-11-30 9:54 [COMMITTED PATCH] Fix procfs.c compilation Rainer Orth
2023-11-30 16:29 ` Simon Marchi
2023-12-01 10:09 ` Rainer Orth
2023-12-10 23:07 ` Mark Wielaard
2023-12-11 14:40 ` Rainer Orth
2023-12-12 9:40 ` Mark Wielaard
2023-12-13 9:15 ` Rainer Orth
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-03-31 8:40 Rainer Orth
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).