From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11167 invoked by alias); 7 Sep 2014 14:23:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 11150 invoked by uid 89); 7 Sep 2014 14:23:57 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-ie0-f172.google.com Received: from mail-ie0-f172.google.com (HELO mail-ie0-f172.google.com) (209.85.223.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:23:56 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f172.google.com with SMTP id tr6so139070ieb.31 for ; Sun, 07 Sep 2014 07:23:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :mime-version:content-type; bh=SkydFAC8Ge5SMqYmGIkDAfoli+yYsVrvY9zF3hIUctY=; b=CGXQKj5IeJhoGADo0DYicCPNqVKcb9JJdFHBvpJbvDVbgFjiUTFON072NnltZtF+G0 1lpmPHPGclZL955WWcQ9AgJG2gzId7nzdQ8t+tw6rgsMShtmXcdI8OvKw13LDbMckS2z c5be4+GCxTXeN7/ErqdSYmxOmnHXP01LJcwP2Uyf2P3s7of4haKwmmRhC9ib6xE1RDNW jN0yxVB4duN5RFbLqbQz2k8pgzOcRdGwk+0wczzvNIb4Lwnmz2lNe4g4lTxmdB9gIhfw 12OT16HwxsJNxWuQranmAnFj0gIVtOxAOUkjfvBW+iwOTCUGr0tDarBHeD3cjeYcId6A vXFw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnk6Lqz7br9NS/ldCC0RM1YAnwTVPXajl3/XsdmrNjix2CUNhapgBWzrkgib4XUMqfeeyCp X-Received: by 10.50.26.66 with SMTP id j2mr17842709igg.45.1410099834454; Sun, 07 Sep 2014 07:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (CPE687f74122463-CM84948c2e0610.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [99.226.94.59]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id p5sm6551137iga.5.2014.09.07.07.23.53 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 07 Sep 2014 07:23:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Anthony Green To: gdb@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand Subject: Question about ppc reverse stepping Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:23:00 -0000 Message-ID: <8761gztsp3.fsf@moxielogic.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg00021.txt.bz2 I'm reviewing the gdb.reverse test results for my PPC process record patch. Here's an example of a failure that I'm not sure what to do about. solib-reverse.exp has an executable with undebuggable shared libraries. The test is written such that it expects reverse stepping over calls to the solib to skip the call completely. However, on ppc linux, reverse stepping has me stepping through some glue magic before popping out the other end. In the text below, when I'm on line 46, the test case expects that reverse-step lands me on line 44 (at the bottom) without all of the intermediate steps. 46 return 0; /* end part one */ (gdb) reverse-step 0x00003fffb7fb08b8 in .shr1 () from /home/green/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.reverse/shr1.sl (gdb) reverse-step Single stepping until exit from function .shr1, which has no line number information. 0x00003fffb7fb08b0 in .shr1 () from /home/green/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.reverse/shr1.sl (gdb) reverse-step Single stepping until exit from function .shr1, which has no line number information. 0x0000000010000638 in 00000011.plt_call.shr1+0 () (gdb) reverse-step Single stepping until exit from function 00000011.plt_call.shr1+0, which has no line number information. main () at ./gdb.reverse/solib-reverse.c:44 44 shr1 ("message 3\n"); /* shr1 three */ Is this what we really want? Or can I modify the test to repeatedly step over the .shr1 lines? AG