From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8247 invoked by alias); 28 May 2005 18:54:18 -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 8238 invoked by uid 22791); 28 May 2005 18:54:16 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 May 2005 18:54:15 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Dc6Rg-00056Q-N3; Sat, 28 May 2005 14:54:04 -0400 Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 22:10:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Richard Henderson , gdb-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [testsuite/alpha] Add test for step over fbne instruction Message-ID: <20050528185404.GH26806@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , Richard Henderson , gdb-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <20050525064819.GA5406@redhat.com> <20050526023539.GL1525@adacore.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050526023539.GL1525@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00588.txt.bz2 On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 12:35:39PM +1000, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > > Thanks for the couple of suggestions. Is the attached better? > > > > Yes, though I'm confused as to why you didn't use the 4 or 5 insn > > hand-coded routine that I gave you, which is more like what you would > > get from the compiler with -O2 -ffast-math. > > Because I'm lazy? ;-). Seriously, that was a good suggestion, and I have > now used it in this iteration of the testcase. I took this opportunity > to actually test all forms of FP branch instructions, with branch taken > and branch not taken. That way, that should cover most cases. I left > the edge cases for another time. > > 2005-05-20 Joel Brobecker > > * gdb.arch/alpha-step.c: New file. > * gdb.arch/alpha-step.exp: New testcase. > > Tested on alpha-tru64 5.1a. We now have 21 FAILs revealed by this testcase. > Before the following patch was applied, we had 30. > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-05/msg00479.html > > I used an ancient version of GDB, before the switch to software single-step > was made, and I have an all PASS. > > Will investigate the FAILs as soon as possible. > > OK to apply? This is OK. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC