[PATCH 0/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[PATCH 0/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[Yao Qi]

Hi,
Command 'tdump' should be run on the current stack frame instead of
the selected stack frame.  The patch 3/3 is to change to the current
stack trace when executing command 'tdump'.  When writing test case
for this change, I did some cleanups in gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (in
patch 1/3) and get the test result unique (patch 2/3).

Regression tested on x86_64-linux.

*** BLURB HERE ***

Yao Qi (3):
  Tweak gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
  Make test result of gdb.trace/backtrace.exp unique
  Select the current frame in command tdump.

 gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp |   86 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 gdb/tracepoint.c                      |    6 ++
 2 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.7.6

[PATCH 2/3] Make test result of gdb.trace/backtrace.exp unique

[Yao Qi]

The test result of gdb.trace/backtrace.exp is not unique.

$ cat testsuite/gdb.sum | grep "gdb..*:" | sed 's/[A-Z]\+: //g' | sort | uniq -c | sort -n

 4 gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: 8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr

This patch is fix it.  With this patch applied, the result becomes:

 1 gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: traceframe 14: 8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr
 1 gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: traceframe 19: 8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr
 1 gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: traceframe 4: 8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr
 1 gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: traceframe 9: 8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr

gdb/testsuite:

2013-06-27  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>

	PR gdb/13443
	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (gdb_backtrace_tdp_3): Add parameter
	'traceframe'.  Wrap test with with_test_prefix.
	(top level): Update.
---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp |   42 +++++++++++++++++---------------
 1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
index 5349f02..e40428f 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
@@ -209,24 +209,26 @@ proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_3 { msg } {
     }
 }
 
-proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 { msg depth } {
+proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 { msg depth traceframe } {
     global gdb_prompt
 
-    # We are in a trace frame at which we collected all registers,
-    # plus a sizeable hunk of stack memory.  This should enable us to
-    # display at least several stack frames worth of backtrace.  We'll
-    # assume that if we can't display at least "depth" levels (with
-    # args), it counts as an error.
-
-    gdb_test_multiple "backtrace" "$msg" {
-	-re "#$depth\[\t \].*gdb_recursion_test.*depth=\[0-9\]+.*q1=\[0-9\]+.*q2=\[0-9\]+.*q3=\[0-9\]+.*q4=\[0-9\]+.*q5=\[0-9\]+.*q6=\[0-9\]+.*$gdb_prompt $" {
-	    pass "$msg"
-	}
-	-re "#$depth\[\t \].*gdb_recursion_test.*depth=.*$gdb_prompt $" {
-	    fail "$msg (args missing from #$depth stack frame)"
-	}
-	-re "#\[0-9\]+\[\t \].*gdb_recursion_test.*depth=.*$gdb_prompt $" {
-	    fail "$msg (fewer than $depth stack frames found)"
+    with_test_prefix "traceframe $traceframe" {
+	# We are in a trace frame at which we collected all registers,
+	# plus a sizeable hunk of stack memory.  This should enable us to
+	# display at least several stack frames worth of backtrace.  We'll
+	# assume that if we can't display at least "depth" levels (with
+	# args), it counts as an error.
+
+	gdb_test_multiple "backtrace" "$msg" {
+	    -re "#$depth\[\t \].*gdb_recursion_test.*depth=\[0-9\]+.*q1=\[0-9\]+.*q2=\[0-9\]+.*q3=\[0-9\]+.*q4=\[0-9\]+.*q5=\[0-9\]+.*q6=\[0-9\]+.*$gdb_prompt $" {
+		pass "$msg"
+	    }
+	    -re "#$depth\[\t \].*gdb_recursion_test.*depth=.*$gdb_prompt $" {
+		fail "$msg (args missing from #$depth stack frame)"
+	    }
+	    -re "#\[0-9\]+\[\t \].*gdb_recursion_test.*depth=.*$gdb_prompt $" {
+		fail "$msg (fewer than $depth stack frames found)"
+	    }
 	}
     }
 }
@@ -258,7 +260,7 @@ gdb_backtrace_tdp_3 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect args and locals"
 gdb_tfind_test "8.6: find frame 4"     "4" "4"
 gdb_test "printf \"TDP \%d:\\n\", \$tracepoint" \
 	"TDP $tdp6:" ""
-gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr" "0"
+gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr" "0" 4
 
 gdb_tfind_test "8.6: find frame 5"     "5" "5"
 gdb_test "printf \"TDP \%d:\\n\", \$tracepoint" \
@@ -279,7 +281,7 @@ gdb_backtrace_tdp_3 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 2, collect args and locals"
 gdb_tfind_test "8.6: find frame 9"     "9" "9"
 gdb_test "printf \"TDP \%d:\\n\", \$tracepoint" \
 	"TDP $tdp6:" ""
-gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr" "0"
+gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr" "0" 9
 
 gdb_tfind_test "8.6: find frame 10"    "10" "10"
 gdb_test "printf \"TDP \%d:\\n\", \$tracepoint" \
@@ -300,7 +302,7 @@ gdb_backtrace_tdp_3 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 3, collect args and locals"
 gdb_tfind_test "8.6: find frame 14"    "14" "14"
 gdb_test "printf \"TDP \%d:\\n\", \$tracepoint" \
 	"TDP $tdp6:" ""
-gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr" "0"
+gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr" "0" 14
 
 gdb_tfind_test "8.6: find frame 15"    "15" "15"
 gdb_test "printf \"TDP \%d:\\n\", \$tracepoint" \
@@ -321,7 +323,7 @@ gdb_backtrace_tdp_3 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 4, collect args and locals"
 gdb_tfind_test "8.6: find frame 19"    "19" "19"
 gdb_test "printf \"TDP \%d:\\n\", \$tracepoint" \
 	"TDP $tdp6:" ""
-gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr" "0"
+gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 "8.6: Backtrace, depth == 1, collect stack mem expr" "0" 19
 
 gdb_test "printf \"x \%d x\\n\", depth == 3" \
 	"x 0 x" \
-- 
1.7.7.6

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Make test result of gdb.trace/backtrace.exp unique

[Pedro Alves]

On 06/27/2013 03:02 PM, Yao Qi wrote:

> 2013-06-27  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>
> 
> 	PR gdb/13443
> 	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (gdb_backtrace_tdp_3): Add parameter
> 	'traceframe'.  Wrap test with with_test_prefix.
> 	(top level): Update.

OK.

-- 
Pedro Alves

[PATCH 1/3] Tweak gdb.trace/backtrace.exp

[Yao Qi]

Hi,
When I write test for command 'tdump' on selected frame, I find
backtrace.exp is a good place.  However, backtrace.exp needs some
cleanups here and there.  This is what this patch does.

gdb/testsuite:

2013-06-27  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>

	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: Don't invoke 'get_exit' and 'gdb_start'.
	Invoke 'prepare_for_testing' instead of 'gdb_compile'.
	Use gdb_test_no_output to issue commands 'tstart' and 'tstop'.
---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp |   25 ++++++++++++-------------
 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
index e6447ac..5349f02 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
@@ -17,21 +17,20 @@
 
 load_lib "trace-support.exp"
 
+standard_testfile actions.c
+set executable $testfile
+set expfile $testfile.exp
 
-gdb_exit
-gdb_start
+if [prepare_for_testing $expfile $executable $srcfile \
+	[list debug nowarnings]] {
+    untested "failed to prepare for trace tests"
+    return -1
+}
 
-standard_testfile actions.c
-if { [gdb_compile "$srcdir/$subdir/$srcfile" $binfile \
-	  executable {debug nowarnings}] != "" } {
-    untested backtrace.exp
+if ![runto_main] {
+    fail "Can't run to main to check for trace support"
     return -1
 }
-gdb_load $binfile
-gdb_test "tstop"       ".*" ""
-gdb_test "tfind none"  ".*" ""
-runto_main
-gdb_reinitialize_dir $srcdir/$subdir
 
 if { ![gdb_target_supports_trace] } then {
     unsupported "Current target does not support trace"
@@ -156,14 +155,14 @@ gdb_trace_setactions "8.6: setup TP to collect stack mem cast expr" \
        "$tdp6" \
        "collect $fpreg, \(\*\(void \*\*\) \($spreg\)\) @ 64" "^$"
 
-gdb_test "tstart" ".*" ""
+gdb_test_no_output "tstart" ""
 
 gdb_test "break end" ".*" ""
 gdb_test "continue" \
     "Continuing.*Breakpoint $decimal, end.*" \
     "run trace experiment"
 
-gdb_test "tstop" ".*" ""
+gdb_test_no_output "tstop" ""
 
 proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_1 { msg } {
     global gdb_prompt
-- 
1.7.7.6

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Tweak gdb.trace/backtrace.exp

[Pedro Alves]

On 06/27/2013 03:02 PM, Yao Qi wrote:

> 2013-06-27  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>
> 
> 	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: Don't invoke 'get_exit' and 'gdb_start'.
> 	Invoke 'prepare_for_testing' instead of 'gdb_compile'.
> 	Use gdb_test_no_output to issue commands 'tstart' and 'tstop'.

OK.

-- 
Pedro Alves

[PATCH 3/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[Yao Qi]

Command 'tdump' should be run on the current stack frame instead of
the selected stack frame.  This patch is to change to the current
stack trace when executing command 'tdump'.

This patch also adds a test in gdb.trace/backtrace.exp, to test
'tdump' on frame 0 and frame 1 respectively. If only test
part of patch is applied, we'll get a fail:

Data collected at tracepoint 6, trace frame 4:^M
$ebp = (void *) 0xbfffe7c8^M
(*(void **) ($esp)) @ 64 = {0x3, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x5, 0x6,
0x4cf0d152 <handle_intel+146>, 0xbfffe7cf, 0x0, 0x8a18d300,
0xbfffe7a0, 0x8, 0xbfffe7a3, 0x80487c0, 0x80487b4, 0xf0b2ff,
0x8048243, 0xca0000, 0x4d01cff4, 0x0, 0x0, 0xbfffe818, 0x80486c7
<main+62>, 0xbfffe7e4, 0x8049abc, 0x1, 0x80482cd <_init+41>,
0x4d01b1b4, 0x0, 0x1, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x6, 0x7, 0x8, 0x9, 0xa,
0x80486e0 <__libc_csu_init>, 0x0, 0x0, 0x4ce896b3
<__libc_start_main+243>, 0x1, 0xbfffe8b4, 0xbfffe8bc, 0x4ce6cfc4,
<unavailable> <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>,
<unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>,
<unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>,
<unavailable>}
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(gdb) FAIL: gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: traceframe 4: tdump on frame 1

as we can see, "<unavailable>" is unexpected.  With all the patch
applied, the fail is fixed, and we'll see that no "<unavailable>"
appeared in the output.

Data collected at tracepoint 6, trace frame 4:^M
$ebp = (void *) 0xbfffe768^M
(*(void **) ($esp)) @ 64 = {0xbfffe810, 0x4ce55a39
<_dl_lookup_symbol_x+265>, 0xbfffe7f0, 0x80481cc, 0xbfffe7d8,
0x4ce6da54, 0x0, 0xb7ffeca8, 0x1, 0x0, 0x1, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0xbfffe7c8,
0x80485fc <gdb_c_test+450>, 0x3, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x5, 0x6,
0x4cf0d152 <handle_intel+146>, 0xbfffe7cf, 0x0, 0x96dfd800,
0xbfffe7a0, 0x8, 0xbfffe7a3, 0x80487c0, 0x80487b4, 0xf0b2ff,
0x8048243, 0xca0000, 0x4d01cff4, 0x0, 0x0, 0xbfffe818, 0x80486c7
<main+62>, 0xbfffe7e4, 0x8049abc, 0x1, 0x80482cd <_init+41>,
0x4d01b1b4, 0x0, 0x1, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x6, 0x7, 0x8, 0x9, 0xa,
0x80486e0 <__libc_csu_init>, 0x0, 0x0, 0x4ce896b3
<__libc_start_main+243>, 0x1, 0xbfffe8b4, 0xbfffe8bc, 0x4ce6cfc4}^M
(gdb) PASS: gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: traceframe 4: tdump on frame 1

gdb:

2013-06-27  Pedro Alves  <pedro@codesourcery.com>
	    Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>

	* tracepoint.c (trace_dump_command): Select the current frame.

gdb/testsuite:

2013-06-27  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>

	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (gdb_backtrace_tdp_4): Test command
	'tdump' on stack frame 0 and 1 respectively.
---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp |   19 +++++++++++++++++++
 gdb/tracepoint.c                      |    6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
index e40428f..6f32f2a 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
@@ -211,6 +211,7 @@ proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_3 { msg } {
 
 proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 { msg depth traceframe } {
     global gdb_prompt
+    global decimal hex
 
     with_test_prefix "traceframe $traceframe" {
 	# We are in a trace frame at which we collected all registers,
@@ -230,6 +231,24 @@ proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 { msg depth traceframe } {
 		fail "$msg (fewer than $depth stack frames found)"
 	    }
 	}
+
+	# Make sure no output like "0x0 <repeats 2 times>" confuses
+	# the matching below.
+	gdb_test_no_output "set print repeats 64" ""
+
+	# Match the output of command 'tdump' like '0xbfffe810' or
+	# '0x4ce55a39 <_dl_lookup_symbol_x+265>'.
+	gdb_test "tdump" \
+	    "Data collected at tracepoint $decimal, trace frame $decimal:.* = \\{($hex, |$hex <.*>, ){63}($hex|$hex <.*>)\\}" \
+	    "tdump on frame 0"
+
+	gdb_test "up" ".*" ""
+
+	# Test command 'tdump' still work properly when the selected
+	# frame is not the current frame.
+	gdb_test "tdump" \
+	    "Data collected at tracepoint $decimal, trace frame $decimal:.* = \\{($hex, |$hex <.*>, ){63}($hex|$hex <.*>)\\}" \
+	    "tdump on frame 1"
     }
 }
 
diff --git a/gdb/tracepoint.c b/gdb/tracepoint.c
index 4277843..eb276e9 100644
--- a/gdb/tracepoint.c
+++ b/gdb/tracepoint.c
@@ -3071,6 +3071,12 @@ trace_dump_command (char *args, int from_tty)
 		   tracepoint_number, traceframe_number);
 
   old_chain = make_cleanup (null_cleanup, NULL);
+
+  /* This command only makes sense for the current frame, not the
+     selected frame.  */
+  make_cleanup_restore_current_thread ();
+  select_frame (get_current_frame ());
+
   actions = all_tracepoint_actions_and_cleanup (loc->owner);
 
   trace_dump_actions (actions, 0, stepping_frame, from_tty);
-- 
1.7.7.6

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[Pedro Alves]

On 06/27/2013 03:02 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> Command 'tdump' should be run on the current stack frame instead of
> the selected stack frame. 

Thanks.

> This patch is to change to the current
> stack trace when executing command 'tdump'.
> 
> This patch also adds a test in gdb.trace/backtrace.exp, to test
> 'tdump' on frame 0 and frame 1 respectively. If only test
> part of patch is applied, we'll get a fail:
> 
> Data collected at tracepoint 6, trace frame 4:^M
> $ebp = (void *) 0xbfffe7c8^M
> (*(void **) ($esp)) @ 64 = {0x3, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x5, 0x6,
> 0x4cf0d152 <handle_intel+146>, 0xbfffe7cf, 0x0, 0x8a18d300,
> 0xbfffe7a0, 0x8, 0xbfffe7a3, 0x80487c0, 0x80487b4, 0xf0b2ff,
> 0x8048243, 0xca0000, 0x4d01cff4, 0x0, 0x0, 0xbfffe818, 0x80486c7
> <main+62>, 0xbfffe7e4, 0x8049abc, 0x1, 0x80482cd <_init+41>,
> 0x4d01b1b4, 0x0, 0x1, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x6, 0x7, 0x8, 0x9, 0xa,
> 0x80486e0 <__libc_csu_init>, 0x0, 0x0, 0x4ce896b3
> <__libc_start_main+243>, 0x1, 0xbfffe8b4, 0xbfffe8bc, 0x4ce6cfc4,
> <unavailable> <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>,
> <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>,
> <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>, <unavailable>,
> <unavailable>}
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: traceframe 4: tdump on frame 1
> 
> as we can see, "<unavailable>" is unexpected.  With all the patch
> applied, the fail is fixed, and we'll see that no "<unavailable>"
> appeared in the output.
> 
> Data collected at tracepoint 6, trace frame 4:^M
> $ebp = (void *) 0xbfffe768^M
> (*(void **) ($esp)) @ 64 = {0xbfffe810, 0x4ce55a39
> <_dl_lookup_symbol_x+265>, 0xbfffe7f0, 0x80481cc, 0xbfffe7d8,
> 0x4ce6da54, 0x0, 0xb7ffeca8, 0x1, 0x0, 0x1, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0xbfffe7c8,
> 0x80485fc <gdb_c_test+450>, 0x3, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x5, 0x6,
> 0x4cf0d152 <handle_intel+146>, 0xbfffe7cf, 0x0, 0x96dfd800,
> 0xbfffe7a0, 0x8, 0xbfffe7a3, 0x80487c0, 0x80487b4, 0xf0b2ff,
> 0x8048243, 0xca0000, 0x4d01cff4, 0x0, 0x0, 0xbfffe818, 0x80486c7
> <main+62>, 0xbfffe7e4, 0x8049abc, 0x1, 0x80482cd <_init+41>,
> 0x4d01b1b4, 0x0, 0x1, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5, 0x6, 0x7, 0x8, 0x9, 0xa,
> 0x80486e0 <__libc_csu_init>, 0x0, 0x0, 0x4ce896b3
> <__libc_start_main+243>, 0x1, 0xbfffe8b4, 0xbfffe8bc, 0x4ce6cfc4}^M
> (gdb) PASS: gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: traceframe 4: tdump on frame 1
> 
> gdb:
> 
> 2013-06-27  Pedro Alves  <pedro@codesourcery.com>
> 	    Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>
> 
> 	* tracepoint.c (trace_dump_command): Select the current frame.
> 
> gdb/testsuite:
> 
> 2013-06-27  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>
> 
> 	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (gdb_backtrace_tdp_4): Test command
> 	'tdump' on stack frame 0 and 1 respectively.
> ---
>  gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp |   19 +++++++++++++++++++
>  gdb/tracepoint.c                      |    6 ++++++
>  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
> index e40428f..6f32f2a 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
> @@ -211,6 +211,7 @@ proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_3 { msg } {
>  
>  proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 { msg depth traceframe } {
>      global gdb_prompt
> +    global decimal hex
>  
>      with_test_prefix "traceframe $traceframe" {
>  	# We are in a trace frame at which we collected all registers,
> @@ -230,6 +231,24 @@ proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 { msg depth traceframe } {
>  		fail "$msg (fewer than $depth stack frames found)"
>  	    }
>  	}
> +
> +	# Make sure no output like "0x0 <repeats 2 times>" confuses
> +	# the matching below.
> +	gdb_test_no_output "set print repeats 64" ""
> +
> +	# Match the output of command 'tdump' like '0xbfffe810' or
> +	# '0x4ce55a39 <_dl_lookup_symbol_x+265>'.
> +	gdb_test "tdump" \
> +	    "Data collected at tracepoint $decimal, trace frame $decimal:.* = \\{($hex, |$hex <.*>, ){63}($hex|$hex <.*>)\\}" \
> +	    "tdump on frame 0"
> +
> +	gdb_test "up" ".*" ""
> +
> +	# Test command 'tdump' still work properly when the selected
> +	# frame is not the current frame.
> +	gdb_test "tdump" \
> +	    "Data collected at tracepoint $decimal, trace frame $decimal:.* = \\{($hex, |$hex <.*>, ){63}($hex|$hex <.*>)\\}" \
> +	    "tdump on frame 1"

IMO, this testing method isn't as robust or easy to understand/debug as it
could be.  IMO, the best would be to store the output of tdump while looking
at frame #0, and then compare that to the output of tdump while looking
at frame #1.  It should come out the same.  See gdb.base/gcore.exp,
capture_command_output, etc..  WDYT?

-- 
Pedro Alves

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[Yao Qi]

On 07/29/2013 11:44 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> IMO, this testing method isn't as robust or easy to understand/debug as it
> could be.  IMO, the best would be to store the output of tdump while looking
> at frame #0, and then compare that to the output of tdump while looking
> at frame #1.  It should come out the same.  See gdb.base/gcore.exp,
> capture_command_output, etc..  WDYT?

That makes sense to me.  The output on frame 0 and on frame 1
should be identical.  We can compare them.  How do you think the
patch below?

-- 
Yao (齐尧)


gdb:

2013-07-30  Pedro Alves  <pedro@codesourcery.com>
	    Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>

	* tracepoint.c (trace_dump_command): Select the current frame.

gdb/testsuite:

2013-07-30  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>

	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (gdb_backtrace_tdp_4): Test command
	'tdump' on stack frame 0 and 1 respectively.
---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp |   31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 gdb/tracepoint.c                      |    6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
index e40428f..f35c22a 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
@@ -230,6 +230,37 @@ proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 { msg depth traceframe } {
 		fail "$msg (fewer than $depth stack frames found)"
 	    }
 	}
+
+	set output_string0 ""
+	# Match the output of command 'tdump' and save it in
+	# $output_string0.
+	set test "tdump on frame 0"
+	gdb_test_multiple "tdump" $test {
+	    -re "tdump\[\r\n\]+(.*)\[\r\n\]+$gdb_prompt $" {
+		set output_string0 $expect_out(1,string)
+	    }
+	}
+
+	gdb_test "up" ".*" ""
+
+	# Test command 'tdump' still work properly when the selected
+	# frame is not the current frame, and save the output in
+	# $output_string1.
+	set test "tdump on frame 1"
+	set output_string1 ""
+	gdb_test_multiple "tdump" $test {
+	    -re "tdump\[\r\n\]+(.*)\[\r\n\]+$gdb_prompt $" {
+		set output_string1 $expect_out(1,string)
+	    }
+	}
+
+	# Output of 'tdump' on frame 0 and frame 1 should be
+	# identical.
+	if ![string compare $output_string0 $output_string1]  {
+	    pass "tdump output"
+	} else {
+	    fail "tdump output"
+	}
     }
 }
 
diff --git a/gdb/tracepoint.c b/gdb/tracepoint.c
index 8b70bd3..ce61fb7 100644
--- a/gdb/tracepoint.c
+++ b/gdb/tracepoint.c
@@ -3065,6 +3065,12 @@ trace_dump_command (char *args, int from_tty)
 		   tracepoint_number, traceframe_number);
 
   old_chain = make_cleanup (null_cleanup, NULL);
+
+  /* This command only makes sense for the current frame, not the
+     selected frame.  */
+  make_cleanup_restore_current_thread ();
+  select_frame (get_current_frame ());
+
   actions = all_tracepoint_actions_and_cleanup (loc->owner);
 
   trace_dump_actions (actions, 0, stepping_frame, from_tty);
-- 
1.7.7.6

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[Pedro Alves]

On 07/30/2013 02:22 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> gdb:
> 
> 2013-07-30  Pedro Alves  <pedro@codesourcery.com>
> 	    Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>
> 
> 	* tracepoint.c (trace_dump_command): Select the current frame.
> 
> gdb/testsuite:
> 
> 2013-07-30  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>
> 
> 	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (gdb_backtrace_tdp_4): Test command
> 	'tdump' on stack frame 0 and 1 respectively.

OK, thanks.

> +	# Test command 'tdump' still work properly when the selected
> +	# frame is not the current frame, and save the output in
> +	# $output_string1.

"still works".

Suggest:

	Test that the 'tdump' command still works

-- 
Pedro Alves

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[Yao Qi]

On 07/30/2013 09:30 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> "still works".
> 
> Suggest:
> 
> 	Test that the 'tdump' command still works

Fixed.  Patch 1/3 and 2/3 are committed.  Patch 3/3 is committed too
with the typo fix in comment.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)

gdb:

2013-07-31  Pedro Alves  <pedro@codesourcery.com>
	    Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>

	* tracepoint.c (trace_dump_command): Select the current frame.

gdb/testsuite:

2013-07-31  Yao Qi  <yao@codesourcery.com>

	* gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (gdb_backtrace_tdp_4): Test command
	'tdump' on stack frame 0 and 1 respectively.
---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp |   31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 gdb/tracepoint.c                      |    6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
index e40428f..c3a7ec3 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.trace/backtrace.exp
@@ -230,6 +230,37 @@ proc gdb_backtrace_tdp_4 { msg depth traceframe } {
 		fail "$msg (fewer than $depth stack frames found)"
 	    }
 	}
+
+	set output_string0 ""
+	# Match the output of command 'tdump' and save it in
+	# $output_string0.
+	set test "tdump on frame 0"
+	gdb_test_multiple "tdump" $test {
+	    -re "tdump\[\r\n\]+(.*)\[\r\n\]+$gdb_prompt $" {
+		set output_string0 $expect_out(1,string)
+	    }
+	}
+
+	gdb_test "up" ".*" ""
+
+	# Test that command 'tdump' still works properly when the
+	# selected frame is not the current frame, and save the output
+	# in $output_string1.
+	set test "tdump on frame 1"
+	set output_string1 ""
+	gdb_test_multiple "tdump" $test {
+	    -re "tdump\[\r\n\]+(.*)\[\r\n\]+$gdb_prompt $" {
+		set output_string1 $expect_out(1,string)
+	    }
+	}
+
+	# Output of 'tdump' on frame 0 and frame 1 should be
+	# identical.
+	if ![string compare $output_string0 $output_string1]  {
+	    pass "tdump output"
+	} else {
+	    fail "tdump output"
+	}
     }
 }
 
diff --git a/gdb/tracepoint.c b/gdb/tracepoint.c
index 8b70bd3..ce61fb7 100644
--- a/gdb/tracepoint.c
+++ b/gdb/tracepoint.c
@@ -3065,6 +3065,12 @@ trace_dump_command (char *args, int from_tty)
 		   tracepoint_number, traceframe_number);
 
   old_chain = make_cleanup (null_cleanup, NULL);
+
+  /* This command only makes sense for the current frame, not the
+     selected frame.  */
+  make_cleanup_restore_current_thread ();
+  select_frame (get_current_frame ());
+
   actions = all_tracepoint_actions_and_cleanup (loc->owner);
 
   trace_dump_actions (actions, 0, stepping_frame, from_tty);
-- 
1.7.7.6

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[Yao Qi]

On 06/27/2013 10:02 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> Command 'tdump' should be run on the current stack frame instead of
> the selected stack frame.  The patch 3/3 is to change to the current
> stack trace when executing command 'tdump'.  When writing test case
> for this change, I did some cleanups in gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (in
> patch 1/3) and get the test result unique (patch 2/3).
>
> Regression tested on x86_64-linux.

Ping.  http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-06/msg00817.html

-- 
Yao (齐尧)

[ping 2]: [PATCH 0/3] Select the current frame in command tdump.

[Yao Qi]

On 07/22/2013 09:13 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
>> Command 'tdump' should be run on the current stack frame instead of
>> >the selected stack frame.  The patch 3/3 is to change to the current
>> >stack trace when executing command 'tdump'.  When writing test case
>> >for this change, I did some cleanups in gdb.trace/backtrace.exp (in
>> >patch 1/3) and get the test result unique (patch 2/3).
>> >
>> >Regression tested on x86_64-linux.
> Ping.http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-06/msg00817.html

Ping 2.  http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-06/msg00817.html

-- 
Yao (齐尧)