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 33995382EA1E; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 09:04:25 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 33995382EA1E
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org;
	s=default; t=1666861470;
	bh=xYCPeIGbAsvGzavKqmhZh8ZzJ/CF27w7FRjazbwy43g=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=DyBo/Mpq1d2dVumnumfsJZHvYwruCszpaosUuJr7u4rdK5cJDvyHBz+gbr17Ed5OM
	 9tEflLKWAzEdpTrH1Ov+bKpqQFWrcLgLvoXjTmFwDPbTpsX1eXVSA/5RNWmzKlMAlM
	 czbb6jomj65NCtX6WHnY4MtJDsnKrvgNsDFoeYS0=
From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/29726] [gdb] FAIL:
 gdb.server/connect-with-no-symbol-file.exp: sysroot=: action=delete:
 connection to GDBserver succeeded
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2022 09:04:23 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-29726-4717-hqfgwSl6RZ@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-29726-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-29726-4717@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=3D29726

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

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

--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0)
> This doesn't look like a gdb bug, but I have no idea yet what it could be.

I think I understand what's going on.

We're using remote_spawn instead of remote_exec to do chmod 000, and never =
wait
for it.

So, we know for sure that the chmod 000 has started, but we don't know when=
 it
actually will have effect, which explains the failure I saw: it could have
lingered until after the copy that was supposed to restore the permission.

So, the non-intrusive way to fix this is to wait for the chmod 000 pid befo=
re
moving on to the next scenario.

OTOH, it's possible that using remote_spawn is a mistake, and remote_exec w=
as
meant.

In the original submission (
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2016-February/131420.html ) we
had:
...
+if {[file exists $binfile]} {
+    system "chmod 000 $binfile"
+}
...
but after a review comment "Seems like this won't work with remote-host
testing?" it was changed to:
...
+       } elseif { $action =3D=3D "permission" } {
+         remote_spawn target "chmod 000 $binfile"
+       }
...
which was committed.

Then there was a patch to fix behaviour with remote-gdbserver-on-localhost,
which would have gone with remote_exec:
...
+proc make_inaccessible { file } {
+    remote_exec host "chmod 000 $file"
+    remote_exec target "chmod 000 $file"
+}
...

Taking all this into account, I think the use of remote_spawn was a mistake.

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