* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp @ 2006-04-09 21:53 Nick Roberts 2006-04-10 3:31 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Nick Roberts @ 2006-04-09 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: gdb-patches > 2006-04-08 David S. Miller <davem@sunset.davemloft.net> > * gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp (111-data-list-register-values x): "No registers" > will get printed without a mi_cmd_data_list_register_values prefix. > (*-data-list-register-*): Correct regular expressions to expect the new > pseudo d? floating point registers. Do you need to apply these changes to mi2-regs.exp also? Should there be similar tests for other architectures? If they are only intended for sparc, shouldn't this file be called mi-sparc-regs.exp? -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-04-09 21:53 [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp Nick Roberts @ 2006-04-10 3:31 ` David S. Miller 2006-04-10 7:05 ` Nick Roberts 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2006-04-10 3:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: nickrob; +Cc: gdb-patches From: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz> Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 09:52:41 +1200 > > > 2006-04-08 David S. Miller <davem@sunset.davemloft.net> > > > * gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp (111-data-list-register-values x): "No registers" > > will get printed without a mi_cmd_data_list_register_values prefix. > > (*-data-list-register-*): Correct regular expressions to expect the new > > pseudo d? floating point registers. > > Do you need to apply these changes to mi2-regs.exp also? Yes. > Should there be similar tests for other architectures? If they are only > intended for sparc, shouldn't this file be called mi-sparc-regs.exp? There are "XXX" style comments in there suggesting that strings for other platforms should be added. It is a similar situation to gdb.base/float.exp, knowledgable people just have to get around to adding the per-target strings. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-04-10 3:31 ` David S. Miller @ 2006-04-10 7:05 ` Nick Roberts 2006-04-10 7:20 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Nick Roberts @ 2006-04-10 7:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: gdb-patches > > Should there be similar tests for other architectures? If they are only > > intended for sparc, shouldn't this file be called mi-sparc-regs.exp? > > There are "XXX" style comments in there suggesting that strings > for other platforms should be added. > > It is a similar situation to gdb.base/float.exp, knowledgable people > just have to get around to adding the per-target strings. But these tests are for the MI interface. Register tests for specific architectures could presumably go in gdb.base/regs.exp and tests in mi-regs.exp could be more general e.g just check -data-list-register-names returns a list of values, count them and use this information for tests on -data-list-register-values. Anyway, Daniel will approve your patch, I'm just thinking aloud. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-04-10 7:05 ` Nick Roberts @ 2006-04-10 7:20 ` David S. Miller 2006-04-10 12:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2006-04-10 7:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: nickrob; +Cc: gdb-patches From: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz> Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:05:07 +1200 > But these tests are for the MI interface. Register tests for specific > architectures could presumably go in gdb.base/regs.exp and tests in mi-regs.exp > could be more general e.g just check -data-list-register-names returns a list > of values, count them and use this information for tests on > -data-list-register-values. In the long term that's probably a good idea. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-04-10 7:20 ` David S. Miller @ 2006-04-10 12:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2006-04-11 1:30 ` Nick Roberts 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2006-04-10 12:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: nickrob, gdb-patches On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 12:20:41AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz> > Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:05:07 +1200 > > > But these tests are for the MI interface. Register tests for specific > > architectures could presumably go in gdb.base/regs.exp and tests in mi-regs.exp > > could be more general e.g just check -data-list-register-names returns a list > > of values, count them and use this information for tests on > > -data-list-register-values. > > In the long term that's probably a good idea. mi-regs.exp should check "the registers are internally consistent and sane". It could encode knowledge of which registers must be present, or not; it works either way... This will definitely need a refresh if my XML-based description work is merged to trunk, since the register ordering may then be up to the target. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-04-10 12:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2006-04-11 1:30 ` Nick Roberts 2006-05-05 20:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Nick Roberts @ 2006-04-11 1:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: David S. Miller, gdb-patches > > > But these tests are for the MI interface. Register tests for specific > > > architectures could presumably go in gdb.base/regs.exp and tests in > > > mi-regs.exp could be more general e.g just check > > > -data-list-register-names returns a list of values, count them and use > > > this information for tests on -data-list-register-values. > > > > In the long term that's probably a good idea. > > mi-regs.exp should check "the registers are internally consistent > and sane". It could encode knowledge of which registers must be > present, or not; it works either way... I'm not sure if you're agreeing or not. I think I made the change to mi_cmd_data_list_register_values which broke the test for sparc. As I ran the testsuite on i386, I saw no failures of course. Clearly tests which check the registers are internally consistent and sane for all architectures are desirable. Since no-one is offering to do that shall I try to write a few generic ones as suggested above? -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-04-11 1:30 ` Nick Roberts @ 2006-05-05 20:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2006-05-06 0:23 ` Nick Roberts 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2006-05-05 20:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nick Roberts; +Cc: David S. Miller, gdb-patches On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 01:30:22PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > I'm not sure if you're agreeing or not. I think I made the change to > mi_cmd_data_list_register_values which broke the test for sparc. As I ran > the testsuite on i386, I saw no failures of course. Right. Although, from what David said, it was already broken by an earlier (?) SPARC-specific change. > Clearly tests which check the registers are internally consistent and > sane for all architectures are desirable. Since no-one is offering > to do that shall I try to write a few generic ones as suggested > above? If you'd like to do this, by all means, please do. For now, we can fix up the SPARC tests, but I don't expect them to stay useful forever. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-05-05 20:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2006-05-06 0:23 ` Nick Roberts 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Nick Roberts @ 2006-05-06 0:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: gdb-patches > > Clearly tests which check the registers are internally consistent and > > sane for all architectures are desirable. Since no-one is offering > > to do that shall I try to write a few generic ones as suggested > > above? > > If you'd like to do this, by all means, please do. For now, we can fix > up the SPARC tests, but I don't expect them to stay useful forever. As things are going to change, I think I'll leave it for the moment. I'm starting to realise that many things are untested and some don't even work. I want to focus on the latter. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp
@ 2006-04-09 4:21 David S. Miller
2006-05-05 20:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: David S. Miller @ 2006-04-09 4:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
This test only runs on sparc 32-bit platforms, and when the "d?"
pseudo registers were added to the sparc target nobody noticed that
this caused the mi-regs test case to regress.
Also, the 111-data-list-register-values test that runs before the
executable is started expects a command name prefix to the error
message, but that won't happen because this message originates from
the generic frame handling in gdb/frame.c
Ok to apply?
2006-04-08 David S. Miller <davem@sunset.davemloft.net>
* gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp (111-data-list-register-values x): "No registers"
will get printed without a mi_cmd_data_list_register_values prefix.
(*-data-list-register-*): Correct regular expressions to expect the new
pseudo d? floating point registers.
--- gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp.~1~ 2004-08-09 09:32:44.000000000 -0700
+++ gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-04-08 21:10:55.000000000 -0700
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@
"wrong arguments"
mi_gdb_test "111-data-list-register-values x" \
- ".*111\\^error,msg=\"mi_cmd_data_list_register_values: No registers\.\"" \
+ ".*111\\^error,msg=\"No registers\.\"" \
"no executable"
}
@@ -71,41 +71,41 @@
set float2 "\\-?\[0-9\]+"
mi_gdb_test "111-data-list-register-names" \
- "111\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"g0\",\"g1\",\"g2\",\"g3\",\"g4\",\"g5\",\"g6\",\"g7\",\"o0\",\"o1\",\"o2\",\"o3\",\"o4\",\"o5\",\"sp\",\"o7\",\"l0\",\"l1\",\"l2\",\"l3\",\"l4\",\"l5\",\"l6\",\"l7\",\"i0\",\"i1\",\"i2\",\"i3\",\"i4\",\"i5\",\"fp\",\"i7\",\"f0\",\"f1\",\"f2\",\"f3\",\"f4\",\"f5\",\"f6\",\"f7\",\"f8\",\"f9\",\"f10\",\"f11\",\"f12\",\"f13\",\"f14\",\"f15\",\"f16\",\"f17\",\"f18\",\"f19\",\"f20\",\"f21\",\"f22\",\"f23\",\"f24\",\"f25\",\"f26\",\"f27\",\"f28\",\"f29\",\"f30\",\"f31\",\"y\",\"psr\",\"wim\",\"tbr\",\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fpsr\",\"cpsr\"\\\]" \
+ "111\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"g0\",\"g1\",\"g2\",\"g3\",\"g4\",\"g5\",\"g6\",\"g7\",\"o0\",\"o1\",\"o2\",\"o3\",\"o4\",\"o5\",\"sp\",\"o7\",\"l0\",\"l1\",\"l2\",\"l3\",\"l4\",\"l5\",\"l6\",\"l7\",\"i0\",\"i1\",\"i2\",\"i3\",\"i4\",\"i5\",\"fp\",\"i7\",\"f0\",\"f1\",\"f2\",\"f3\",\"f4\",\"f5\",\"f6\",\"f7\",\"f8\",\"f9\",\"f10\",\"f11\",\"f12\",\"f13\",\"f14\",\"f15\",\"f16\",\"f17\",\"f18\",\"f19\",\"f20\",\"f21\",\"f22\",\"f23\",\"f24\",\"f25\",\"f26\",\"f27\",\"f28\",\"f29\",\"f30\",\"f31\",\"y\",\"psr\",\"wim\",\"tbr\",\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fsr\",\"csr\",\"d0\",\"d2\",\"d4\",\"d6\",\"d8\",\"d10\",\"d12\",\"d14\",\"d16\",\"d18\",\"d20\",\"d22\",\"d24\",\"d26\",\"d28\",\"d30\"\\\]" \
"list register names"
mi_gdb_test "222-data-list-register-values x" \
- "222\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \
+ "222\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \
"register values x"
mi_gdb_test "333-data-list-register-values f" \
- "333\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"1\",value=\"$float\"\},.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \
+ "333\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"1\",value=\"$float\"\},.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \
"register values f"
mi_gdb_test "444-data-list-register-values d" \
- "444\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$decimal\"\}\\\]" \
+ "444\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$decimal\"\}\\\]" \
"register values d"
mi_gdb_test "555-data-list-register-values o" \
- "555\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$octal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$octal\"\}\\\]" \
+ "555\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$octal\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$octal\"\}\\\]" \
"register values o"
mi_gdb_test "666-data-list-register-values t" \
- "666\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$binary\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$binary\"\}\\\]" \
+ "666\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$binary\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$binary\"\}\\\]" \
"register values t"
- # On the sparc, registers 0-31 are int, 32-63 float, 64-71 int
+ # On the sparc, registers 0-31 are int, 32-63 float, 64-71 int, 72-87 float
mi_gdb_test "777-data-list-register-values N" \
- "777\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"31\",value=\"$decimal\"\},\{number=\"32\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"63\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"64\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$decimal\"\}\\\]" \
+ "777\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"31\",value=\"$decimal\"\},\{number=\"32\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"63\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"64\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$decimal\"\},\{number=\"72\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \
"register values N"
mi_gdb_test "888-data-list-register-values r" \
- "888\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \
+ "888\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \
"register values r"
mi_gdb_test "999-data-list-register-names 68 69 70 71" \
- "999\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fpsr\",\"cpsr\"\\\]" \
+ "999\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fsr\",\"csr\"\\\]" \
"list names of some regs"
mi_gdb_test "001-data-list-register-values x 68 69 70 71" \
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-04-09 4:21 David S. Miller @ 2006-05-05 20:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2006-05-05 23:15 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2006-05-05 20:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: gdb-patches On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 09:21:33PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > > 2006-04-08 David S. Miller <davem@sunset.davemloft.net> > > * gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp (111-data-list-register-values x): "No registers" > will get printed without a mi_cmd_data_list_register_values prefix. > (*-data-list-register-*): Correct regular expressions to expect the new > pseudo d? floating point registers. OK, with a corresponding fix to mi2-regs.exp. Sorry for the delay getting back to you. I'll be going through the rest of your pending patches this afternoon, I hope. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-05-05 20:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2006-05-05 23:15 ` David S. Miller 2006-05-05 23:21 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2006-05-05 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: drow; +Cc: gdb-patches From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 16:06:45 -0400 > On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 09:21:33PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > > > > 2006-04-08 David S. Miller <davem@sunset.davemloft.net> > > > > * gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp (111-data-list-register-values x): "No registers" > > will get printed without a mi_cmd_data_list_register_values prefix. > > (*-data-list-register-*): Correct regular expressions to expect the new > > pseudo d? floating point registers. > > OK, with a corresponding fix to mi2-regs.exp. I went back to this to push these changes to the mi2-regs.exp test case, but I ran into a problem. Is $decimal supposed to match negative numbers? It seems that if I mark a register value as expected to be $decimal, then negative numbers such as -358127 do not match. > Sorry for the delay getting back to you. I'll be going through the > rest of your pending patches this afternoon, I hope. No problem. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-05-05 23:15 ` David S. Miller @ 2006-05-05 23:21 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2006-05-05 23:22 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2006-05-05 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David S. Miller; +Cc: gdb-patches On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 04:15:04PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > I went back to this to push these changes to the mi2-regs.exp test > case, but I ran into a problem. > > Is $decimal supposed to match negative numbers? It seems that if > I mark a register value as expected to be $decimal, then negative > numbers such as -358127 do not match. No, I don't think so. So just use "-?$decimal"? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-05-05 23:21 ` Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2006-05-05 23:22 ` David S. Miller 2006-05-05 23:35 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2006-05-05 23:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: drow; +Cc: gdb-patches From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 19:21:07 -0400 > On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 04:15:04PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > > I went back to this to push these changes to the mi2-regs.exp test > > case, but I ran into a problem. > > > > Is $decimal supposed to match negative numbers? It seems that if > > I mark a register value as expected to be $decimal, then negative > > numbers such as -358127 do not match. > > No, I don't think so. So just use "-?$decimal"? Ok, I'll give that a try. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 2006-05-05 23:22 ` David S. Miller @ 2006-05-05 23:35 ` David S. Miller 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: David S. Miller @ 2006-05-05 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: drow; +Cc: gdb-patches From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net> Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 16:22:41 -0700 (PDT) > From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> > Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 19:21:07 -0400 > > > On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 04:15:04PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > > > I went back to this to push these changes to the mi2-regs.exp test > > > case, but I ran into a problem. > > > > > > Is $decimal supposed to match negative numbers? It seems that if > > > I mark a register value as expected to be $decimal, then negative > > > numbers such as -358127 do not match. > > > > No, I don't think so. So just use "-?$decimal"? > > Ok, I'll give that a try. Yep that works, here is the final patch I checked in. 2006-05-05 David S. Miller <davem@sunset.davemloft.net> * gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp (111-data-list-register-values x): "No registers" will get printed without a mi_cmd_data_list_register_values prefix. (*-data-list-register-*): Correct regular expressions to expect the new pseudo d? floating point registers. * gdb.mi/mi2-regs.exp: Likewise. Index: gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp,v retrieving revision 1.12 diff -u -p -r1.12 mi-regs.exp --- gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 9 Aug 2004 16:32:44 -0000 1.12 +++ gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp 5 May 2006 23:26:24 -0000 @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ proc sparc_register_tests_no_exec { } { "wrong arguments" mi_gdb_test "111-data-list-register-values x" \ - ".*111\\^error,msg=\"mi_cmd_data_list_register_values: No registers\.\"" \ + ".*111\\^error,msg=\"No registers\.\"" \ "no executable" } @@ -71,41 +71,41 @@ proc sparc_register_tests { } { set float2 "\\-?\[0-9\]+" mi_gdb_test "111-data-list-register-names" \ - "111\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"g0\",\"g1\",\"g2\",\"g3\",\"g4\",\"g5\",\"g6\",\"g7\",\"o0\",\"o1\",\"o2\",\"o3\",\"o4\",\"o5\",\"sp\",\"o7\",\"l0\",\"l1\",\"l2\",\"l3\",\"l4\",\"l5\",\"l6\",\"l7\",\"i0\",\"i1\",\"i2\",\"i3\",\"i4\",\"i5\",\"fp\",\"i7\",\"f0\",\"f1\",\"f2\",\"f3\",\"f4\",\"f5\",\"f6\",\"f7\",\"f8\",\"f9\",\"f10\",\"f11\",\"f12\",\"f13\",\"f14\",\"f15\",\"f16\",\"f17\",\"f18\",\"f19\",\"f20\",\"f21\",\"f22\",\"f23\",\"f24\",\"f25\",\"f26\",\"f27\",\"f28\",\"f29\",\"f30\",\"f31\",\"y\",\"psr\",\"wim\",\"tbr\",\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fpsr\",\"cpsr\"\\\]" \ + "111\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"g0\",\"g1\",\"g2\",\"g3\",\"g4\",\"g5\",\"g6\",\"g7\",\"o0\",\"o1\",\"o2\",\"o3\",\"o4\",\"o5\",\"sp\",\"o7\",\"l0\",\"l1\",\"l2\",\"l3\",\"l4\",\"l5\",\"l6\",\"l7\",\"i0\",\"i1\",\"i2\",\"i3\",\"i4\",\"i5\",\"fp\",\"i7\",\"f0\",\"f1\",\"f2\",\"f3\",\"f4\",\"f5\",\"f6\",\"f7\",\"f8\",\"f9\",\"f10\",\"f11\",\"f12\",\"f13\",\"f14\",\"f15\",\"f16\",\"f17\",\"f18\",\"f19\",\"f20\",\"f21\",\"f22\",\"f23\",\"f24\",\"f25\",\"f26\",\"f27\",\"f28\",\"f29\",\"f30\",\"f31\",\"y\",\"psr\",\"wim\",\"tbr\",\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fsr\",\"csr\",\"d0\",\"d2\",\"d4\",\"d6\",\"d8\",\"d10\",\"d12\",\"d14\",\"d16\",\"d18\",\"d20\",\"d22\",\"d24\",\"d26\",\"d28\",\"d30\"\\\]" \ "list register names" mi_gdb_test "222-data-list-register-values x" \ - "222\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \ + "222\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \ "register values x" mi_gdb_test "333-data-list-register-values f" \ - "333\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"1\",value=\"$float\"\},.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \ + "333\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"1\",value=\"$float\"\},.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \ "register values f" mi_gdb_test "444-data-list-register-values d" \ - "444\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$decimal\"\}\\\]" \ + "444\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\}\\\]" \ "register values d" mi_gdb_test "555-data-list-register-values o" \ - "555\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$octal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$octal\"\}\\\]" \ + "555\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$octal\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$octal\"\}\\\]" \ "register values o" mi_gdb_test "666-data-list-register-values t" \ - "666\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$binary\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$binary\"\}\\\]" \ + "666\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$binary\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$binary\"\}\\\]" \ "register values t" - # On the sparc, registers 0-31 are int, 32-63 float, 64-71 int + # On the sparc, registers 0-31 are int, 32-63 float, 64-71 int, 72-87 float mi_gdb_test "777-data-list-register-values N" \ - "777\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"31\",value=\"$decimal\"\},\{number=\"32\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"63\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"64\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$decimal\"\}\\\]" \ + "777\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"31\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\},\{number=\"32\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"63\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"64\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\},\{number=\"72\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \ "register values N" mi_gdb_test "888-data-list-register-values r" \ - "888\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \ + "888\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \ "register values r" mi_gdb_test "999-data-list-register-names 68 69 70 71" \ - "999\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fpsr\",\"cpsr\"\\\]" \ + "999\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fsr\",\"csr\"\\\]" \ "list names of some regs" mi_gdb_test "001-data-list-register-values x 68 69 70 71" \ Index: gdb.mi/mi2-regs.exp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi2-regs.exp,v retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -p -r1.2 mi2-regs.exp --- gdb.mi/mi2-regs.exp 9 Aug 2004 22:21:54 -0000 1.2 +++ gdb.mi/mi2-regs.exp 5 May 2006 23:26:24 -0000 @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ proc sparc_register_tests_no_exec { } { "wrong arguments" mi_gdb_test "111-data-list-register-values x" \ - ".*111\\^error,msg=\"mi_cmd_data_list_register_values: No registers\.\"" \ + ".*111\\^error,msg=\"No registers\.\"" \ "no executable" } @@ -71,41 +71,41 @@ proc sparc_register_tests { } { set float2 "\\-?\[0-9\]+" mi_gdb_test "111-data-list-register-names" \ - "111\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"g0\",\"g1\",\"g2\",\"g3\",\"g4\",\"g5\",\"g6\",\"g7\",\"o0\",\"o1\",\"o2\",\"o3\",\"o4\",\"o5\",\"sp\",\"o7\",\"l0\",\"l1\",\"l2\",\"l3\",\"l4\",\"l5\",\"l6\",\"l7\",\"i0\",\"i1\",\"i2\",\"i3\",\"i4\",\"i5\",\"fp\",\"i7\",\"f0\",\"f1\",\"f2\",\"f3\",\"f4\",\"f5\",\"f6\",\"f7\",\"f8\",\"f9\",\"f10\",\"f11\",\"f12\",\"f13\",\"f14\",\"f15\",\"f16\",\"f17\",\"f18\",\"f19\",\"f20\",\"f21\",\"f22\",\"f23\",\"f24\",\"f25\",\"f26\",\"f27\",\"f28\",\"f29\",\"f30\",\"f31\",\"y\",\"psr\",\"wim\",\"tbr\",\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fpsr\",\"cpsr\"\\\]" \ + "111\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"g0\",\"g1\",\"g2\",\"g3\",\"g4\",\"g5\",\"g6\",\"g7\",\"o0\",\"o1\",\"o2\",\"o3\",\"o4\",\"o5\",\"sp\",\"o7\",\"l0\",\"l1\",\"l2\",\"l3\",\"l4\",\"l5\",\"l6\",\"l7\",\"i0\",\"i1\",\"i2\",\"i3\",\"i4\",\"i5\",\"fp\",\"i7\",\"f0\",\"f1\",\"f2\",\"f3\",\"f4\",\"f5\",\"f6\",\"f7\",\"f8\",\"f9\",\"f10\",\"f11\",\"f12\",\"f13\",\"f14\",\"f15\",\"f16\",\"f17\",\"f18\",\"f19\",\"f20\",\"f21\",\"f22\",\"f23\",\"f24\",\"f25\",\"f26\",\"f27\",\"f28\",\"f29\",\"f30\",\"f31\",\"y\",\"psr\",\"wim\",\"tbr\",\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fsr\",\"csr\",\"d0\",\"d2\",\"d4\",\"d6\",\"d8\",\"d10\",\"d12\",\"d14\",\"d16\",\"d18\",\"d20\",\"d22\",\"d24\",\"d26\",\"d28\",\"d30\"\\\]" \ "list register names" mi_gdb_test "222-data-list-register-values x" \ - "222\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \ + "222\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \ "register values x" mi_gdb_test "333-data-list-register-values f" \ - "333\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"1\",value=\"$float\"\},.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \ + "333\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"1\",value=\"$float\"\},.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \ "register values f" mi_gdb_test "444-data-list-register-values d" \ - "444\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$decimal\"\}\\\]" \ + "444\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\}\\\]" \ "register values d" mi_gdb_test "555-data-list-register-values o" \ - "555\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$octal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$octal\"\}\\\]" \ + "555\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$octal\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$octal\"\}\\\]" \ "register values o" mi_gdb_test "666-data-list-register-values t" \ - "666\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$binary\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$binary\"\}\\\]" \ + "666\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$binary\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$binary\"\}\\\]" \ "register values t" - # On the sparc, registers 0-31 are int, 32-63 float, 64-71 int + # On the sparc, registers 0-31 are int, 32-63 float, 64-71 int, 72-87 float mi_gdb_test "777-data-list-register-values N" \ - "777\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"31\",value=\"$decimal\"\},\{number=\"32\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"63\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"64\",value=\"$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$decimal\"\}\\\]" \ + "777\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"31\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\},\{number=\"32\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"63\",value=\"$float\"\},\{number=\"64\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"-?$decimal\"\},\{number=\"72\",value=\"$float\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$float\"\}\\\]" \ "register values N" mi_gdb_test "888-data-list-register-values r" \ - "888\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"71\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \ + "888\\^done,register-values=\\\[\{number=\"0\",value=\"$hex\"\}.*\{number=\"87\",value=\"$hex\"\}\\\]" \ "register values r" mi_gdb_test "999-data-list-register-names 68 69 70 71" \ - "999\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fpsr\",\"cpsr\"\\\]" \ + "999\\^done,register-names=\\\[\"pc\",\"npc\",\"fsr\",\"csr\"\\\]" \ "list names of some regs" mi_gdb_test "001-data-list-register-values x 68 69 70 71" \ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-05-06 0:23 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2006-04-09 21:53 [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp Nick Roberts 2006-04-10 3:31 ` David S. Miller 2006-04-10 7:05 ` Nick Roberts 2006-04-10 7:20 ` David S. Miller 2006-04-10 12:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2006-04-11 1:30 ` Nick Roberts 2006-05-05 20:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2006-05-06 0:23 ` Nick Roberts -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2006-04-09 4:21 David S. Miller 2006-05-05 20:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2006-05-05 23:15 ` David S. Miller 2006-05-05 23:21 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2006-05-05 23:22 ` David S. Miller 2006-05-05 23:35 ` David S. Miller
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox