From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (gnu.wildebeest.org [45.83.234.184]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AA273857BB2; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 10:50:56 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 1AA273857BB2 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (83-87-18-245.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.87.18.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CE6BA302BBEB; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 12:50:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2FFEB405872B; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 12:50:54 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <8bfa7ec63758afc45bde1f10b0e4ab91e21e9d06.camel@klomp.org> Subject: Re: [builder] gdb_check_step: remove gdb.gdb/selftest.exp From: Mark Wielaard To: Luis Machado Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, buildbot@sourceware.org Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 12:50:53 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20220608185138.675964-1-mark@klomp.org> <2281be8e-8920-7ba5-9e96-ffd713462b9c@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 10:50:57 -0000 Hi, On Fri, 2022-06-10 at 01:21 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 01:09:19AM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 10:37:58AM +0100, Luis Machado wrote: > > > I always use gdb.base/break.exp as a good smoke test. If that one > > > fails, then things > > > are really broken. > > >=20 > > > I think gdb.base/break*.exp should make a good smoke test list. > > > We just need to exclude > > > gdb.base/break-interp.exp, which is problematic on some targets. > >=20 > > It never is just easy is it? :) You are right, I saw break- > > interp.exp > > fail... I tried to come up with a regexp but gave up given that it > > has to go throug python first and then we don't know whether the > > worker uses bash as /bin/sh so I just added them all (exclusing > > break-interp.exp) as a list. >=20 > Sigh, sorry, looks like gdb.base/break-unload-file.exp also sometimes > fails. > I have removed from the list. Hopefully the remaining list does > actually pass. And it didn't :{ Both debian-ppc64 and fedora-ppc64le failed (UNRESOLVED)=20 gdb.base/break-idempotent.exp under both native-gdbserver and native- extended-gdbserver https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#builders/76/builds/446 https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#builders/85/builds/294 So I have removed that one too from the list. The CI test list now looks like: # Only a small subset of tests that are fast and known to PASS. gdb_test_exp =3D ("TESTS=3D " "gdb.base/break-always.exp " "gdb.base/break-caller-line.exp " "gdb.base/break-entry.exp " "gdb.base/break.exp " "gdb.base/break-fun-addr.exp " "gdb.base/break-include.exp " "gdb.base/break-inline.exp " "gdb.base/break-main-file-remove-fail.exp " "gdb.base/break-on-linker-gcd-function.exp " "gdb.base/breakpoint-in-ro-region.exp " "gdb.base/breakpoint-shadow.exp " "gdb.base/break-probes.exp " "gdb.gdb/unittest.exp " "gdb.server/unittest.exp ") Which will be run three times with make gdb-check, once without a target_board, once with native-gdbserver and once with native-extended- gdbserver on centos-x86_64, fedora-x86_64, debian-armhf, debian-arm64, fedora-s390x, debian-ppc64, fedora-ppc64le, opensusetw-x86_64, opensuseleap-x86_64 (debian-armhf only does a build, no make gdb-check because of https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D28561) I'll add a debian-i386 builder so there is more 32bit coverage. All are green now (with the latest change to remove break-idempotent) https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders?tags=3Dgdb Question is if this is a good list, does it need more tests? And should it maybe be maintained in the binutils-gdb repo instead of in the builder repo? For example we could have a make check-gdb-ci target which does what the buildbot would do (and then the buildbot could just call that). Cheers, Mark