* [RFA] Handle expected failure in interrupt.exp for Linux/x86
@ 2001-10-28 7:54 Mark Kettenis
2001-10-29 6:13 ` Fernando Nasser
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Mark Kettenis @ 2001-10-28 7:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Ouch! Letting GDB call a function from an interrupted restartable
system call doesn't work on Linux/x86. This already was an expected
failure. Unfortunately it only deals with a SIGSEGV wheras a SIGILL
is just as likely.
Fixing the actual problem isn't easy. I'll try to come up with
something clever. In the meantime, I'd like to check in this patch.
OK?
Mark
Index: ChangeLog
from Mark Kettenis <kettenis@gnu.org>
* gdb.base/interrupt.exp: Treat SIGILL similar to SIGSEGV such
that we catch the expected failure under Linux/x86.
Index: gdb.base/interrupt.exp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/interrupt.exp,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.3 interrupt.exp
--- gdb.base/interrupt.exp 2001/03/06 08:21:50 1.3
+++ gdb.base/interrupt.exp 2001/10/28 15:46:38
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ if ![file exists $binfile] then {
send_gdb "p func1 ()\n"
gdb_expect {
-re " = 4.*$gdb_prompt $" { pass "call function when asleep" }
- -re ".*Program received signal SIGSEGV.*$gdb_prompt $" {
+ -re ".*Program received signal SIG(SEGV|ILL).*$gdb_prompt $" {
setup_xfail "i*86-pc-linux*-gnu*"
fail "child died when we called func1, skipped rest of tests"
return
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFA] Handle expected failure in interrupt.exp for Linux/x86
2001-10-28 7:54 [RFA] Handle expected failure in interrupt.exp for Linux/x86 Mark Kettenis
@ 2001-10-29 6:13 ` Fernando Nasser
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Fernando Nasser @ 2001-10-29 6:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Kettenis; +Cc: gdb-patches
Mark Kettenis wrote:
>
> Ouch! Letting GDB call a function from an interrupted restartable
> system call doesn't work on Linux/x86. This already was an expected
> failure. Unfortunately it only deals with a SIGSEGV wheras a SIGILL
> is just as likely.
>
> Fixing the actual problem isn't easy. I'll try to come up with
> something clever. In the meantime, I'd like to check in this patch.
>
> OK?
>
> Mark
>
Yes, thanks for the patch.
Fernando
> Index: ChangeLog
> from Mark Kettenis <kettenis@gnu.org>
>
> * gdb.base/interrupt.exp: Treat SIGILL similar to SIGSEGV such
> that we catch the expected failure under Linux/x86.
>
> Index: gdb.base/interrupt.exp
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/interrupt.exp,v
> retrieving revision 1.3
> diff -u -p -r1.3 interrupt.exp
> --- gdb.base/interrupt.exp 2001/03/06 08:21:50 1.3
> +++ gdb.base/interrupt.exp 2001/10/28 15:46:38
> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ if ![file exists $binfile] then {
> send_gdb "p func1 ()\n"
> gdb_expect {
> -re " = 4.*$gdb_prompt $" { pass "call function when asleep" }
> - -re ".*Program received signal SIGSEGV.*$gdb_prompt $" {
> + -re ".*Program received signal SIG(SEGV|ILL).*$gdb_prompt $" {
> setup_xfail "i*86-pc-linux*-gnu*"
> fail "child died when we called func1, skipped rest of tests"
> return
--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-10-29 6:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-10-28 7:54 [RFA] Handle expected failure in interrupt.exp for Linux/x86 Mark Kettenis
2001-10-29 6:13 ` Fernando Nasser
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox