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 BDA463858D20; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:09:30 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BDA463858D20
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org;
	s=default; t=1681474170;
	bh=FTB+CpvGMoCfb2F7i1eAentfaTlW7CS2MVtySk2kcd0=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=ta9kkjHAvQEADRkxRSoiyZb8iubo6+LHNHlbBkqcMB55c122YGKjssJ7QUzMacDKz
	 Cy9sJYhgxIKNlWj03DxCig74Xgc8VB5kb3iYm12pKcZhniwN/e0dT6PjA3uMByLxMJ
	 gRWaj/1/PEsra8cuQoRukR2ujm+DIlbw8C8MJ0eo=
From: "luis.machado at arm dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug gdb/30340] gdb.base/watchpoint-unaligned.exp produces TCL error
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:09:30 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: luis.machado at arm dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: luis.machado at arm dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-30340-4717-VHoeNsj5Rq@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-30340-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-30340-4717@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=3D30340

--- Comment #10 from Luis Machado <luis.machado at arm dot com> ---
Hi Alexandra. Thanks for the info.

I think hardening the test to make sure it doesn't test things that are kno=
wn
to not work is useful still.

With that said, I think we're dealing with a different issue for this
particular AArch64 machine.

Here's your output from cpuinfo:

processor       : 3
BogoMIPS        : 50.00
Features        : fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp
asimdhp cpuid asimdrdm lrcpc dcpop asimddp ssbs
CPU implementer : 0x41
CPU architecture: 8
CPU variant     : 0x3
CPU part        : 0xd0c
CPU revision    : 1

Here's an output from a Ampere Mt Snow I have access to:

processor       : 159
BogoMIPS        : 50.00
Features        : fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp
asimdhp cpuid asimdrdm lrcpc dcpop asimddp ssbs
CPU implementer : 0x41
CPU architecture: 8
CPU variant     : 0x3
CPU part        : 0xd0c
CPU revision    : 1

They are the same, so technically things should work. But you're getting 0 =
for
the debug arch value, which is invalid.

I'll have to do some research on this one. Do you know how this machine is =
set?
Is it a standalone machine or part of a cloud setup? Are there security
features enabled?

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