From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/7] first batch of test suite updates
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:04:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1371675821-9959-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> (raw)
I've been working on a long-term project to fully parallelize the gdb
test suite. The end goal is that it should be possible to run each
.exp file in parallel.
This project has many parts; and the full patch is not quite finished
(and is also very large). I wanted to start sending out some of the
more straightforward changes, mostly so that I wouldn't have to
constantly rebase them. I think these changes are reasonable in their
own right.
This series holds all the "easy" conversions from gdb.base. This is
just straightforward changes to use standard_testfile and
standard_output_file, plus also prepare_for_testing or clean_restart
as well.
This series fixes a few spots where .exp files did not interact well.
For example, cases where the tests used the same executable name.
This regression tests cleanly; however since some file names changed
there are a few minor output changes:
Missing tests:
gdb.base/corefile.exp: args: -core=coremaker.core: PASS
gdb.base/corefile.exp: args: execfile -core=coremaker.core: PASS
gdb.base/info-proc.exp: core break.gcore: PASS
New tests:
gdb.base/corefile.exp: args: -core=corefile.core: PASS
gdb.base/corefile.exp: args: execfile -core=corefile.core: PASS
gdb.base/default.exp: set the history filename: PASS
gdb.base/info-proc.exp: core info-proc.gcore: PASS
I don't consider this to be a problem.
I split the patch up into 7 roughly equal-sized pieces based on file
name.
After this series, gdb.base is still not parallel-clean. There are
some lurking "trickier" cases I omitted from this series, as they
depend on new testsuite/lib infrastructure. I plan to work through
all the easy/obvious bits first, before starting to upstream that
stuff.
Tom
next reply other threads:[~2013-06-19 21:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-19 21:04 Tom Tromey [this message]
2013-06-19 21:04 ` [PATCH 4/7] test suite update - gdb.base/[hijklm] Tom Tromey
2013-06-19 21:04 ` [PATCH 3/7] test suite update - gdb.base/[efg] Tom Tromey
2013-06-19 21:04 ` [PATCH 7/7] test suite update - gdb.base/[t-z] Tom Tromey
2013-06-19 21:04 ` [PATCH 2/7] test suite update - gdb.base/[cd] Tom Tromey
2013-06-19 21:04 ` [PATCH 6/7] test suite update - gdb.base/s* Tom Tromey
2013-06-19 21:04 ` [PATCH 1/7] test suite update - gdb.base/[ab] Tom Tromey
2013-07-01 8:19 ` [patch] testsuite build regression on CentOS-5 [Re: [PATCH 1/7] test suite update - gdb.base/[ab]] Jan Kratochvil
2013-07-02 20:08 ` [commit] " Jan Kratochvil
2013-06-19 21:14 ` [PATCH 5/7] test suite update - gdb.base/[nopqr] Tom Tromey
2013-06-20 14:27 ` [PATCH 0/7] first batch of test suite updates Joel Brobecker
2013-06-20 16:19 ` Pedro Alves
2013-06-20 17:28 ` Tom Tromey
2013-06-27 17:38 ` Tom Tromey
2013-06-27 18:45 ` Tom Tromey
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=1371675821-9959-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com \
--to=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/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