From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 680563857C45; Mon, 20 Nov 2023 23:59:23 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 680563857C45 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1700524763; bh=ptBZx5iimNsfOAvEQ+7Z1Zn0jzpQx1NVxrIek+19cFA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ggzshToIrL4vHYqTBI7LeYuaxkeHiGXeiiJKKZhExEwBgGyfo2xUCKxqnRyCin3UH kGihuW/A+xpUvTUfq31zYEnABt1/s7accI+VwPDf5/Dmp/6VNfb7E43G8hIHHpKuMx grfPmjXiUQxEKeRQCKyU6BPcKK4Q6AxdQg87TkTM= From: "jhb at FreeBSD dot org" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug gdb/30912] Regression: make check TESTS="gdb.base/gcore.exp" RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=native-extended-gdbserver" Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 23:59:22 +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: jhb at FreeBSD dot 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: 14.1 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D30912 jhb at FreeBSD dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jhb at FreeBSD dot org --- Comment #5 from jhb at FreeBSD dot org --- Sorry I didn't see this earlier for some reason, yes, this is related to the fact that when using gdbserver, GDB doesn't know what layout to use when writing out a core dump. The long term solution is to pull the CPUID info from gdbserver in the form= of NT_X86_CPUID, but in the short term we could just always use the Intel layo= ut that GDB assumed before the XSAVE series. That is, we could pick a default layout based on the XCR0 mask that corresponds to one of the known sizes and use that to set both the layout and size. I'll see if I can't come up with= a variant of that today or tomorrow. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=