From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 68C3338654B5; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 14:14:42 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 68C3338654B5
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org;
	s=default; t=1674137682;
	bh=Mvr1jJndusQ6yrPck7ZLC9yQi54rR4UqrPWypGFXscs=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=EI5BdfEYTE3He7drcUel8A3zEgcZMzmtlKerHfG0MQVOWl9JNaCo9fnUUfZ1ma63X
	 0qxOwgF60H2hdafInm7ukukkkxooOgPusPBujayvt64k8uk4p0ylNi3ZKj10YFf2o5
	 JuYu+kioL8BLtoAOvloC477fX3sPRICtwAl9kIfY=
From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug record/29721] [gdb, record, aarch64] FAIL:
 gdb.reverse/solib-precsave.exp: reverse-next third shr1
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 14:14:42 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: record
X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: vries at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-29721-4717-XaoFOwVXYm@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-29721-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-29721-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29721

--- Comment #29 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I've submitted a patch series here (
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2023-January/195920.html ) that
contains a fix for PR30011. With that fix, this PR no longer triggers.

The remaining question for me is whether PR30011 and this PR are duplicates.

Put differently, is there something we can do in gdb to deal with the situa=
tion
that the frame id for first and last insn in a function are not necessarily
equal.

Say we assume that they are equal if the target contains an epilogue unwind=
er,
but if not, we're handling things more conservatively.  This kind of fix co=
uld
be backported to fix the regression that was introduced.

Bruno, any comment?

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=