[Bug tdep/29419] New: [gdb, tdep/aarch64] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[Bug tdep/29419] New: [gdb, tdep/aarch64] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

            Bug ID: 29419
           Summary: [gdb, tdep/aarch64] FAIL:
                    gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22
           Product: gdb
           Version: HEAD
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: tdep
          Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
          Reporter: vries at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

With aarch64, I run into:
...
(gdb) break callee.adb:22^M
Breakpoint 1 at 0x401f78: file caller.adb, line 21.^M
(gdb) FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22
...
while this is expected (copied from x86_64-linux):
...
(gdb) break callee.adb:22^M
Breakpoint 1 at 0x401f10: file callee.adb, line 22.^M
(gdb) PASS: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22
...

Lines:
...
CU: callee.adb:
File name                    Line number    Starting address    View    Stmt
callee.adb                            18                   0               x
callee.adb                            22                   0       1       x
callee.adb                            23                 0x8               x
callee.adb                             -                 0xc


CU: caller.adb:
File name                    Line number    Starting address    View    Stmt
caller.adb                            18            0x401f70               x

callee.adb:
callee.adb                            22            0x401f70       1       x

caller.adb:
caller.adb                            21            0x401f78               x
caller.adb                             -            0x401f7c
...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug tdep/29419] [gdb, tdep/aarch64] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |luis.machado at arm dot com

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug tdep/29419] [gdb, tdep/aarch64] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[luis.machado at arm dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

--- Comment #1 from Luis Machado <luis.machado at arm dot com> ---
This reproduces on Ubuntu 22.04 and 20.04 as well.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug tdep/29419] [gdb, tdep/aarch64] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[luis.machado at arm dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

--- Comment #2 from Luis Machado <luis.machado at arm dot com> ---
I haven't investigated this one yet. I noticed changing the versions of gnat
makes some tests start to PASS or FAIL. Newer gnats seem to have the best
results.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug tdep/29419] [gdb, tdep/aarch64,ppc64le,s390x] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|[gdb, tdep/aarch64] FAIL:   |[gdb,
                   |gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.e |tdep/aarch64,ppc64le,s390x]
                   |xp: break callee.adb:22     |FAIL:
                   |                            |gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.e
                   |                            |xp: break callee.adb:22

--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Observed the same fail with powerpc and s390x.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug tdep/29419] [gdb, tdep/aarch64,ppc64le,s390x] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Reproduces on x86_64-linux with "trust-producer" hardcoded to yes:
...
diff --git a/gdb/amd64-tdep.c b/gdb/amd64-tdep.c
index 0563b32a54b..5e87eb4f778 100644
--- a/gdb/amd64-tdep.c
+++ b/gdb/amd64-tdep.c
@@ -2538,16 +2538,21 @@ amd64_skip_prologue (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, CORE_ADD
R start_pc)
     {
       CORE_ADDR post_prologue_pc
        = skip_prologue_using_sal (gdbarch, func_addr);
+#if 0
       struct compunit_symtab *cust = find_pc_compunit_symtab (func_addr);
+#endif

       /* LLVM backend (Clang/Flang) always emits a line note before the
         prologue and another one after.  We trust clang and newer Intel
         compilers to emit usable line notes.  */
       if (post_prologue_pc
+#if 0
          && (cust != NULL
              && cust->producer () != nullptr
              && (producer_is_llvm (cust->producer ())
-             || producer_is_icc_ge_19 (cust->producer ()))))
+             || producer_is_icc_ge_19 (cust->producer ())))
+#endif
+         )
         return std::max (start_pc, post_prologue_pc);
     }

...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug tdep/29419] [gdb, tdep/aarch64,ppc64le,s390x] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> Reproduces on x86_64-linux with "trust-producer" hardcoded to yes:

Doing a full testrun reveals sofar:
...
FAIL: gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp: continue
FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22
FAIL: gdb.ada/ptype_tagged_param.exp: ptype s, with debug info
FAIL: gdb.ada/ref_param.exp: frame argument value printed
FAIL: gdb.arch/amd64-prologue-xmm.exp: stopped at func
...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug tdep/29419] [gdb, tdep/aarch64,ppc64le,s390x] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #5)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> > Reproduces on x86_64-linux with "trust-producer" hardcoded to yes:
> 
> Doing a full testrun reveals sofar:
> ...
> FAIL: gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp: continue
> FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22
> FAIL: gdb.ada/ptype_tagged_param.exp: ptype s, with debug info
> FAIL: gdb.ada/ref_param.exp: frame argument value printed
> FAIL: gdb.arch/amd64-prologue-xmm.exp: stopped at func
> ...

and:

FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-var-invalidate-shlib.exp: separate_debuginfo=0: in new process:
global_var recreated (unexpected output)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-var-invalidate-shlib.exp: separate_debuginfo=1: in new process:
global_var recreated (unexpected output)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-var-invalidate.exp: linteger not anymore in scope due to binary
changes (unexpected output)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-var-invalidate.exp: no type for invalid variable linteger (1)
(unexpected output)
FAIL: gdb.opt/inline-small-func.exp: info breakpoints
FAIL: gdb.reverse/singlejmp-reverse.exp: next to v = 1
FAIL: gdb.reverse/singlejmp-reverse.exp: next to f
FAIL: gdb.reverse/singlejmp-reverse.exp: next to nodebug
FAIL: gdb.reverse/singlejmp-reverse.exp: next to v = 3
FAIL: gdb.reverse/singlejmp-reverse.exp: reverse-step
FAIL: gdb.reverse/singlejmp-reverse.exp: reverse-next

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug tdep/29419] [gdb, tdep/aarch64,ppc64le,s390x] FAIL: gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp: break callee.adb:22

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29419

--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2022-August/191343.html

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.