public inbox for gdb@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: testsuite: FAILs in funcargs.exp
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 16:48:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030902164838.GA31977@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030902131113.GE1859@cygbert.vinschen.de>

On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 03:11:13PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have the following two FAILs when running funcargs.exp, which I don't
> quite understand:
> 
>   Breakpoint 37, 0x00001b42 in call6k () at testsuite/gdb.base/funcargs.c:360
>   360     {
>   (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/funcargs.exp: continue to call6k
> 
> and
> 
>   Breakpoint 49, 0x00002628 in hitbottom () at testsuite/gdb.base/funcargs.c:605
>   605     {
>   (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/funcargs.exp: run to hitbottom
> 
> As it turns out, gdb's reply contains in both cases an hex address plus the
> word "in" while in both cases expect doesn't expect this.  As a side note,
> the previous setting of these breakpoints confirms, that both breakpoints
> has been hit correctly:
> 
>   (gdb) break call6k
>   Breakpoint 37 at 0x1b42: file testsuite/gdb.base/funcargs.c, line 360.
> 
>   (gdb) break hitbottom
>   Breakpoint 49 at 0x2628: file testsuite/gdb.base/funcargs.c, line 605.
> 
> The first case fails since testsuite/lib/gdb.exp, the procedure gdb_continue
> doesn't expect a hex address:
> 
>   return [gdb_test "continue" ".*Breakpoint $decimal, $function .*" "continue to $function"];
> 
> The second case fails for the same reason in funcargs.exp, procedure
> recursive_structs_by_value:
> 
>     gdb_expect {
> 	 -re ".*Breakpoint $decimal, hitbottom .*$gdb_prompt $" { pass "run to hitbottom" }
> 	 -re "$gdb_prompt $" { fail "run to hitbottom" ; gdb_suppress_tests; }
> 	 timeout { fail "(timeout) run to hitbottom" ; gdb_suppress_tests; }
>     }
> 
> Is that a problem with these tests or why don't they expect that gdb
> prints the additional hex address?

The hex address means that GDB believes we are not at the beginning of
the line.  Normally when we skip the prologue we do end up at the
beginning of the line.

It could be a problem in prologue skipping, or it could be a problem
with the debug information; or it could just be that the tests should
be more lenient.  I don't remember if moving breakpoints to the middle
of a line in this case is considered acceptable or not.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

  reply	other threads:[~2003-09-02 16:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-09-02 13:11 Corinna Vinschen
2003-09-02 16:48 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2003-09-02 17:13 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2003-09-02 22:22 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-09-03  9:16   ` Corinna Vinschen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20030902164838.GA31977@nevyn.them.org \
    --to=drow@mvista.com \
    --cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).