[Bug gdb/31293] New: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp failure

[Bug gdb/31293] New: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp failure

[simon.marchi at polymtl dot ca]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31293

            Bug ID: 31293
           Summary: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp failure
           Product: gdb
           Version: HEAD
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: gdb
          Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
          Reporter: simon.marchi at polymtl dot ca
  Target Milestone: ---

This is a failure in a new test.  On Debian 12:

$ make check TESTS="gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp"
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_live_inferior: thread apply 7 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_live_inferior: thread apply 6 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_live_inferior: thread apply 4 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_live_inferior: thread apply 3 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_corefile: thread apply 7 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_corefile: thread apply 5 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_corefile: thread apply 3 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_corefile: thread apply 2 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_gcore: thread apply 7 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_gcore: thread apply 6 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_gcore: thread apply 4 backtrace
FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_gcore: thread apply 3 backtrace

the first failure looks like:

thread apply 7 backtrace

Thread 7 (Thread 0x7ffff55c06c0 (LWP 1900077) "threadcrash"):
#0  0x00007ffff7e98385 in clock_nanosleep () from
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#1  0x00007ffff7e9cc93 in nanosleep () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#2  0x00007ffff7e9cbca in sleep () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#3  0x00005555555553c1 in do_syscall_task (location=SIGNAL_ALT_STACK) at
/home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/threadcrash.c:158
#4  0x0000555555555536 in signal_handler (signo=12) at
/home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/threadcrash.c:245
#5  <signal handler called>
#6  0x00007ffff7e53d3c in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#7  0x00005555555556f8 in thread_function (arg=0x5555555592f0) at
/home/smarchi/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/threadcrash.c:326
#8  0x00007ffff7e52044 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#9  0x00007ffff7ed261c in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
(gdb) FAIL: gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp: test_live_inferior: thread apply 7
backtrace

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

[Bug gdb/31293] gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp failure

[simon.marchi at polymtl dot ca]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31293

Simon Marchi <simon.marchi at polymtl dot ca> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |blarsen at redhat dot com

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

[Bug gdb/31293] gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp failure

[blarsen at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31293

--- Comment #1 from Guinevere Larsen <blarsen at redhat dot com> ---
I don't think this is a problem in the test. The point of the test is that we
should be able to unwind correctly all frames. Since the backtrace of the
failure does contain "??", the test is flagging a real issue in Debian 12, I
think.

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

[Bug testsuite/31293] gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp failure

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31293

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|gdb                         |testsuite
                 CC|                            |vries at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I ran into a similar FAIL on aarch64-linux (manjaro on pinebook).  The debug
info of libc is missing, so gdb can only rely on elf symbol information, and
the address that is being displayed is in a function for which there is no
information (static or unexported, I'm not sure).

So, I think it's a testsuite issue.

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

[Bug testsuite/31293] gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp failure

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31293

--- Comment #3 from Sourceware Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Tom de Vries <vries@sourceware.org>:

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=f215d2d8ad7bc1f80e68a962196f0e6dc02951c9

commit f215d2d8ad7bc1f80e68a962196f0e6dc02951c9
Author: Guinevere Larsen <blarsen@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon Mar 11 10:57:32 2024 +0100

    gdb/testsuite: Reduce gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp reliance on libc symbols

    The test gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp demanded GDB to fully unwind and
    print the names of all functions. However, some of the functions are
    from the libc library, and so the test implicitly demanded libc symbols
    to be available, and would fail otherwise, as was raised in PR
    gdb/31293.

    This commit changes it so we only explicitly check for functions that
    are not provided by threadcrash.c if they are indeed available.

    Tested on arm-linux and x86_64-linux.

    Approved-By: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>
    Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31293

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

[Bug testsuite/31293] gdb.threads/threadcrash.exp failure

[vries at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31293

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |15.1
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED

--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.

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