Re: [PING/testsuite] new test gdb.base/pr-1090.exp

Re: [PING/testsuite] new test gdb.base/pr-1090.exp

[Michael Elizabeth Chastain]

Okay, gdb.base/gdb1090.exp coming up.

Michael C

Re: [PING/testsuite] new test gdb.base/pr-1090.exp

[Michael Elizabeth Chastain]

Okay.  Committed.

Michael C

===

2003-03-27  Michael Chastain  <mec@shout.net>

        * gdb.base/gdb1090.exp: New file.
	* gdb.base/gdb1090.cc: New file.

Re: [PING/testsuite] new test gdb.base/pr-1090.exp

[Michael Elizabeth Chastain]

ac> Yes, ok, but, apparently the file name convention is pr1090 rather than 
ac> pr-1090.

There appear to be two conventions in use:

  gdb.c++/pr-1023.exp
  gdb.c++/pr-574.exp
  gdb.mi/gdb669.exp
  gdb.mi/gdb680.exp
  gdb.mi/gdb701.exp
  gdb.mi/gdb792.exp

I didn't see any files like 'pr1090'.

It's just a convention so whatever you want to bless is okay with me.

Michael C

Re: [PING/testsuite] new test gdb.base/pr-1090.exp

[Andrew Cagney]

Oops, s/pr/gdb/.  Where GDB is the bug database, not the category.

Andrew

[PING/testsuite] new test gdb.base/pr-1090.exp

[Michael Elizabeth Chastain]

I submitted this patch on 2003-02-23 and have gotten no response.
Ping.

This is a new test script for pr gdb/1090, which is about register
variables which occupy several registers.  Both gdb 5.3 and gdb
HEAD%20030223 get this wrong.  In my testbed, this happens with
gcc 2.95.3; gcc v3 compilers don't allocate multi-register variables.

The symptom of this bug is that gdb prints the first word of a
structure correctly but botches the second word.  The test has a nice
KFAIL for this.

Okay to commit?

Michael C

=== pr-1090.c

/* Test program for multi-register variable.
   Copyright 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

   This file is part of the gdb testsuite.

   This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
   it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
   the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
   (at your option) any later version.

   This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
   but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
   MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
   GNU General Public License for more details.

   You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
   along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
   Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330,
   Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.
 
   This file was written by Michael Elizabeth Chastain (mec@shout.net).  */

struct s_2_by_4
{
  int field_0;
  int field_1;
};

void marker (struct s_2_by_4 s_whatever)
{
  s_whatever = s_whatever;
  return;
}

void foo ()
{
  /* I want this variable in a register but I can't really force it */
  register struct s_2_by_4 s24;
  s24.field_0 = 1170;
  s24.field_1 = 64701;
  marker (s24);
  return;
}

int main ()
{
  foo ();
}

=== pr-1090.exp

# Copyright 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
# (at your option) any later version.
# 
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
# GNU General Public License for more details.
# 
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
# Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.  

# Tests for PR gdb/1090.
# 2003-02-23  Michael Chastain <mec@shout.net>

# This file is part of the gdb testsuite.

if $tracelevel then {
        strace $tracelevel
        }

#
# test running programs
#
set prms_id 0
set bug_id 0

set testfile "pr-1090"
set srcfile ${testfile}.c
set binfile ${objdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}

if  { [gdb_compile "${srcdir}/${subdir}/${srcfile}" "${binfile}" executable {debug}] != "" } {
     gdb_suppress_entire_file "Testcase compile failed, so all tests in this file will automatically fail."
}

gdb_exit
gdb_start
gdb_reinitialize_dir $srcdir/$subdir
gdb_load ${binfile}

if ![runto marker] then {
    perror "couldn't run to breakpoint"
    continue
} 
gdb_test "up" ".*foo.*" "up from marker"

send_gdb "print s24\n"
gdb_expect {
    -re "\\\$\[0-9\]* = \\{field_0 = 1170, field_1 = 64701\\}\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
	pass "print s24"
    }
    -re "\\\$\[0-9\]* = \\{field_0 = 1170, field_1 = .*\\}\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
	# happens with gcc 2.95.3, which actually puts s24 in registers.
	# gdb cannot find the second register and prints garbage.
	kfail "gdb/1090" "print s24"
    }
    -re ".*$gdb_prompt $" {
	fail "print s24"
    }
    timeout {
	fail "print s24 (timeout)"
    }
}

Re: [PING/testsuite] new test gdb.base/pr-1090.exp

[Andrew Cagney]

Yes, ok, but, apparently the file name convention is pr1090 rather than 
pr-1090.

Andrew