From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32062 invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2003 18:33:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 32054 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2003 18:33:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Jul 2003 18:33:10 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h6MIXAH08339 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 14:33:10 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h6MIXAI04580 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 14:33:10 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (romulus-int.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.46]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h6MIX8v24961; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 14:33:08 -0400 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id 97F002CAB9; Tue, 22 Jul 2003 14:40:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16157.34061.373493.463025@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 18:33:00 -0000 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: ezannoni@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix info address for thread local vars In-Reply-To: <200307211955.h6LJtBPA022135@duracef.shout.net> References: <200307211955.h6LJtBPA022135@duracef.shout.net> X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00393.txt.bz2 Michael Elizabeth Chastain writes: > Hi Elena, > > > I am also really tempted to commit the tls tests (to the mailine > > only), otherwise, the tls feature will bitrot. I'll work through > > refining the tests once they are in. > > Could you file a PR like "tls tests not ready for prime time yet" > and then shovel in a bunch of setup_kfail? > > It's cheesy but it might be better than letting the tests bit rot. > What do people think? > > I'll even volunteer to sprinkle in the setup_kfail's if people > think this is a useful idea. > > Michael C OK, after the commits I get these errors on a RHL system with all the bits installed: Running /home/ezannoni/gdb-sources/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/tls.exp ... FAIL: gdb.threads/tls.exp: info address me === gdb Summary === # of expected passes 59 # of unexpected failures 1 Running /home/ezannoni/gdb-sources/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/tls-shared.exp ... === gdb Summary === # of expected passes 9 That failure is due to some other lossage with info address. I think we need a test for info address in the testsuite.... info address me Symbol "me" is a variable with complex or multiple locations (DWARF2). (gdb) FAIL: gdb.threads/tls.exp: info address me OK, should I xfail/kfail it? I'll create a PR for this. elena