From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32388 invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2007 12:19:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 32360 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Mar 2007 12:19:00 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 12:18:46 +0000 Received: from dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.93.172.95] helo=caradoc.them.org) by nevyn.them.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HQjUC-0000nD-GW; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:18:44 -0400 Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HQjUB-0006ex-Ua; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:18:43 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 12:19:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Improve end check on rs6000 prologue analyzer Message-ID: <20070312121843.GA24487@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060929213726.GA1770@nevyn.them.org> <200609301932.k8UJW0kw030997@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20061017212114.GC12643@nevyn.them.org> <200610181958.k9IJw88G009044@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20070309150504.GA5166@caradoc.them.org> <200703111913.l2BJDEhC006601@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200703111913.l2BJDEhC006601@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg00121.txt.bz2 On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 08:13:14PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Here's a diff of gdb.sum without and with your diff (testsuite with > your diff). The gdb.base/attach.exp failure is "normal"; the result > of that test flips between PASS and FAIL. As you can see, there are > still "odd location failures". Here is an excerpt from gdb.log for one: > > (gdb) list > 134 char *ttyarg = NULL; > (gdb) step > 120 { > (gdb) PASS: gdb.gdb/selftest.exp: step over ttyarg initialization > list > 120 { > (gdb) FAIL: gdb.gdb/selftest.exp: step over ttyarg initialization ended up at odd location > step > 133 char *cdarg = NULL; > (gdb) PASS: gdb.gdb/selftest.exp: step over ttyarg initialization > > This looks as pretty acceptable behaviour. The initializations have > been moved into the prologue so while stepping over the > initializations, we hop back and forth. I'm willing to accept this as > a testsuite problem ;-). Me too. But one thing is really puzzling! We're testing the result of "list" here. The huge gdb_expect includes these two: -re "\[0-9\]*\t\{\r\n$gdb_prompt $" { set description "step over initial brace" set command "step" } -re "\[ \t\]+\{\r\n$gdb_prompt $" { setup_xfail "mips-*-irix5*" fail "$description ended up at odd location" } I would the first one to match. It does plenty of times in my selftest.exp run. The only way I can imagine for that second pattern to match would be for {, but there shouldn't be a space there, just a tab - it comes from print_source_lines_base. Any idea what happened? If you'd like me to beat the testcase into submission, please run "runtest --debug selftest.exp" and send me the dbg.log it generates; that will include every pattern matching attempt. Or, if you don't care, I can just check it in and we can worry about it later. Whichever you prefer :-) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery