* FAILs on x86?
@ 2008-03-27 11:37 Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 11:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Markus Deuling @ 2008-03-27 11:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GDB Patches
Hi,
I see lots of FAILs on x86. Anyone else seeing this?
# of expected passes···Â·······11083
# of unexpected failures·······656
I posted the test results:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-testers/2008-q1/msg00021.html
--
Markus Deuling
GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE
deuling@de.ibm.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 11:37 FAILs on x86? Markus Deuling
@ 2008-03-27 11:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-03-27 12:15 ` Markus Deuling
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2008-03-27 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Markus Deuling; +Cc: GDB Patches
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:37:03PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I see lots of FAILs on x86. Anyone else seeing this?
Not me. What's in gdb.log for a typical failure?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 11:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2008-03-27 12:15 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 12:23 ` Vladimir Prus
2008-03-27 12:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Markus Deuling @ 2008-03-27 12:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz, GDB Patches
Daniel Jacobowitz schrieb:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:37:03PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I see lots of FAILs on x86. Anyone else seeing this?
>
> Not me. What's in gdb.log for a typical failure?
>
Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted
a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago here:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-testers/2008-q1/msg00022.html
As far as I see there were some commits to some areas where GDB test fails
now (gdb.cp, gdb.mi, dfp). If needed I can attach gdb.log
--
Markus Deuling
GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE
deuling@de.ibm.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 12:15 ` Markus Deuling
@ 2008-03-27 12:23 ` Vladimir Prus
2008-03-27 12:33 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 12:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Vladimir Prus @ 2008-03-27 12:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Markus Deuling wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz schrieb:
>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:37:03PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I see lots of FAILs on x86. Anyone else seeing this?
>>
>> Not me. What's in gdb.log for a typical failure?
>>
>
> Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in
> gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago
> here:
>
> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-testers/2008-q1/msg00022.html
>
> As far as I see there were some commits to some areas where GDB test fails
> now (gdb.cp, gdb.mi, dfp). If needed I can attach gdb.log
When were the tests run? gdb.mi failures are supposed to be fixed now.
- Volodya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 12:23 ` Vladimir Prus
@ 2008-03-27 12:33 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 12:55 ` Vladimir Prus
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Markus Deuling @ 2008-03-27 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vladimir Prus; +Cc: gdb-patches
Vladimir Prus schrieb:
> Markus Deuling wrote:
>
>> Daniel Jacobowitz schrieb:
>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:37:03PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I see lots of FAILs on x86. Anyone else seeing this?
>>> Not me. What's in gdb.log for a typical failure?
>>>
>> Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in
>> gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago
>> here:
>>
>> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-testers/2008-q1/msg00022.html
>>
>> As far as I see there were some commits to some areas where GDB test fails
>> now (gdb.cp, gdb.mi, dfp). If needed I can attach gdb.log
>
> When were the tests run? gdb.mi failures are supposed to be fixed now.
>
> - Volodya
>
Today, just an hour ago. I currently re-run tests for ppc and spu.
--
Markus Deuling
GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE
deuling@de.ibm.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 12:15 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 12:23 ` Vladimir Prus
@ 2008-03-27 12:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-03-27 12:48 ` Markus Deuling
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2008-03-27 12:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Markus Deuling; +Cc: GDB Patches
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 01:15:08PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
> Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted
> a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago here:
There's something special or they wouldn't have failed.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 12:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2008-03-27 12:48 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 13:04 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Markus Deuling @ 2008-03-27 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz, GDB Patches
Daniel Jacobowitz schrieb:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 01:15:08PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
>> Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted
>> a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago here:
>
> There's something special or they wouldn't have failed.
>
>
I meant that it doesn't seem to be a setup problem on my machine or s.th. like that.
--
Markus Deuling
GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE
deuling@de.ibm.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 12:33 ` Markus Deuling
@ 2008-03-27 12:55 ` Vladimir Prus
2008-03-27 13:29 ` Markus Deuling
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Vladimir Prus @ 2008-03-27 12:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Markus Deuling; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Thursday 27 March 2008 15:33:08 Markus Deuling wrote:
> Vladimir Prus schrieb:
> > Markus Deuling wrote:
> >
> >> Daniel Jacobowitz schrieb:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:37:03PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I see lots of FAILs on x86. Anyone else seeing this?
> >>> Not me. What's in gdb.log for a typical failure?
> >>>
> >> Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in
> >> gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago
> >> here:
> >>
> >> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-testers/2008-q1/msg00022.html
> >>
> >> As far as I see there were some commits to some areas where GDB test fails
> >> now (gdb.cp, gdb.mi, dfp). If needed I can attach gdb.log
> >
> > When were the tests run? gdb.mi failures are supposed to be fixed now.
> >
> > - Volodya
> >
>
> Today, just an hour ago. I currently re-run tests for ppc and spu.
>
Strange. Does testsuite/Changelog have the following:
2008-03-26 Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
* lib/mi-support.exp (mi_create_varobj_checked): New.
(mi_list_varobj_children): Allow to check for a
value.
(mi_list_array_varobj_children): New.
* gdb.mi/mi-var-child.exp: Use mi_create_varobj
and mi_list_varobj_children, as opposed to hardcoding
expected strings.
* gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: Likewise.
* gdb.mi/gdb792.exp: Likewise.
* gdb.mi/mi-var-block.exp: Likewise.
* gdb.mi/mi-var-cmd.exp: Likewise.
* gdb.mi/mi-var-invalidate.exp: Likewise.
* gdb.mi/mi2-var-block.exp: Likewise.
* gdb.mi/mi2-var-child.exp: Likewise.
* gdb.mi/mi2-var-cmd.exp: Likewise.
* gdb.mi/mi2-var-display.exp: Likewise.
?
- Volodya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 12:48 ` Markus Deuling
@ 2008-03-27 13:04 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2008-03-27 13:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Markus Deuling; +Cc: GDB Patches
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 01:47:45PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz schrieb:
>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 01:15:08PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
>>> Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted
>>> a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago here:
>>
>> There's something special or they wouldn't have failed.
>>
>>
>
> I meant that it doesn't seem to be a setup problem on my machine or s.th. like that.
Please just show us the log for a couple of the tests that newly fail :-)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 12:55 ` Vladimir Prus
@ 2008-03-27 13:29 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 13:40 ` Vladimir Prus
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Markus Deuling @ 2008-03-27 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vladimir Prus; +Cc: gdb-patches
Vladimir Prus schrieb:
> On Thursday 27 March 2008 15:33:08 Markus Deuling wrote:
>> Vladimir Prus schrieb:
>>> Markus Deuling wrote:
>>>
>>>> Daniel Jacobowitz schrieb:
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:37:03PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see lots of FAILs on x86. Anyone else seeing this?
>>>>> Not me. What's in gdb.log for a typical failure?
>>>>>
>>>> Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in
>>>> gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago
>>>> here:
>>>>
>>>> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-testers/2008-q1/msg00022.html
>>>>
>>>> As far as I see there were some commits to some areas where GDB test fails
>>>> now (gdb.cp, gdb.mi, dfp). If needed I can attach gdb.log
>>> When were the tests run? gdb.mi failures are supposed to be fixed now.
>>>
>>> - Volodya
>>>
>> Today, just an hour ago. I currently re-run tests for ppc and spu.
>>
>
> Strange. Does testsuite/Changelog have the following:
>
> 2008-03-26 Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
>
> * lib/mi-support.exp (mi_create_varobj_checked): New.
> (mi_list_varobj_children): Allow to check for a
> value.
> (mi_list_array_varobj_children): New.
>
> * gdb.mi/mi-var-child.exp: Use mi_create_varobj
> and mi_list_varobj_children, as opposed to hardcoding
> expected strings.
> * gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: Likewise.
> * gdb.mi/gdb792.exp: Likewise.
> * gdb.mi/mi-var-block.exp: Likewise.
> * gdb.mi/mi-var-cmd.exp: Likewise.
> * gdb.mi/mi-var-invalidate.exp: Likewise.
> * gdb.mi/mi2-var-block.exp: Likewise.
> * gdb.mi/mi2-var-child.exp: Likewise.
> * gdb.mi/mi2-var-cmd.exp: Likewise.
> * gdb.mi/mi2-var-display.exp: Likewise.
>
> ?
>
> - Volodya
>
>
Yes, I test against current head.
--
Markus Deuling
GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE
deuling@de.ibm.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 13:29 ` Markus Deuling
@ 2008-03-27 13:40 ` Vladimir Prus
2008-03-27 13:51 ` Markus Deuling
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Vladimir Prus @ 2008-03-27 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Markus Deuling; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Thursday 27 March 2008 16:28:51 Markus Deuling wrote:
> Vladimir Prus schrieb:
> > On Thursday 27 March 2008 15:33:08 Markus Deuling wrote:
> >> Vladimir Prus schrieb:
> >>> Markus Deuling wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Daniel Jacobowitz schrieb:
> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:37:03PM +0100, Markus Deuling wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I see lots of FAILs on x86. Anyone else seeing this?
> >>>>> Not me. What's in gdb.log for a typical failure?
> >>>>>
> >>>> Nothing special, I think (I dont think its an environment problem). Just a lot of FAILs in
> >>>> gdb.{base,cp,mi}. I posted a list of the FAILs that are new compared to a testrun some days ago
> >>>> here:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-testers/2008-q1/msg00022.html
> >>>>
> >>>> As far as I see there were some commits to some areas where GDB test fails
> >>>> now (gdb.cp, gdb.mi, dfp). If needed I can attach gdb.log
> >>> When were the tests run? gdb.mi failures are supposed to be fixed now.
> >>>
> >>> - Volodya
> >>>
> >> Today, just an hour ago. I currently re-run tests for ppc and spu.
> >>
> >
> > Strange. Does testsuite/Changelog have the following:
> >
> > 2008-03-26 Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
> >
> > * lib/mi-support.exp (mi_create_varobj_checked): New.
> > (mi_list_varobj_children): Allow to check for a
> > value.
> > (mi_list_array_varobj_children): New.
> >
> > * gdb.mi/mi-var-child.exp: Use mi_create_varobj
> > and mi_list_varobj_children, as opposed to hardcoding
> > expected strings.
> > * gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: Likewise.
> > * gdb.mi/gdb792.exp: Likewise.
> > * gdb.mi/mi-var-block.exp: Likewise.
> > * gdb.mi/mi-var-cmd.exp: Likewise.
> > * gdb.mi/mi-var-invalidate.exp: Likewise.
> > * gdb.mi/mi2-var-block.exp: Likewise.
> > * gdb.mi/mi2-var-child.exp: Likewise.
> > * gdb.mi/mi2-var-cmd.exp: Likewise.
> > * gdb.mi/mi2-var-display.exp: Likewise.
> >
> > ?
> >
> > - Volodya
> >
> >
>
> Yes, I test against current head.
Then, I need gdb.log part for the first failure, namely this:
FAIL: gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: create fooPtr
- Volodya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 13:40 ` Vladimir Prus
@ 2008-03-27 13:51 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 14:19 ` Vladimir Prus
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Markus Deuling @ 2008-03-27 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vladimir Prus; +Cc: gdb-patches
Vladimir Prus schrieb:
> Then, I need gdb.log part for the first failure, namely this:
>
> FAIL: gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: create fooPtr
Is this the correct snippet? Let me know if you want other parts. I can send you the whole file
to your email address if you want to.
220-exec-next
220^running
(gdb)
220*stopped,reason="end-stepping-range",thread-id="0",frame={addr="0x0804839c",func="main",args=[],file="/home/deuling/gdb/dev/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/gdb701.c",fullname="/home/deuling/gdb/dev/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/gdb701.c",line="14"}
(gdb)
PASS: gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: step over "foo = 0"
-var-create fooPtr * foo
^done,name="fooPtr",numchild="3",type="Foo *"
(gdb)
FAIL: gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: create fooPtr
-var-list-children fooPtr
^done,numchild="3",children=[child={name="fooPtr.x",exp="x",numchild="0",type="int"},child={name="fooPtr.y",exp="y",numchild="0",type="int"},child={name="fooPtr.z",exp="z",numchild="0",type="int"}]
(gdb)
PASS: gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: list children of fooPtr
-var-list-children fooPtr.x
^done,numchild="0"
(gdb)
PASS: gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: list children of fooPtr.x
-var-list-children fooPtr.y
^done,numchild="0"
(gdb)
--
Markus Deuling
GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE
deuling@de.ibm.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: FAILs on x86?
2008-03-27 13:51 ` Markus Deuling
@ 2008-03-27 14:19 ` Vladimir Prus
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Vladimir Prus @ 2008-03-27 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Markus Deuling; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Thursday 27 March 2008 16:51:07 you wrote:
>
> Vladimir Prus schrieb:
> > Then, I need gdb.log part for the first failure, namely this:
> >
> > FAIL: gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: create fooPtr
>
> Is this the correct snippet? Let me know if you want other parts. I can send you the whole file
> to your email address if you want to.
>
> 220-exec-next
>
> 220^running
>
> (gdb)
>
> 220*stopped,reason="end-stepping-range",thread-id="0",frame={addr="0x0804839c",func="main",args=[],file="/home/deuling/gdb/dev/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/gdb701.c",fullname="/home/deuling/gdb/dev/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/gdb701.c",line="14"}
>
> (gdb)
>
> PASS: gdb.mi/gdb701.exp: step over "foo = 0"
> -var-create fooPtr * foo
>
> ^done,name="fooPtr",numchild="3",type="Foo *"
>
> (gdb)
I assume the extra newlines appeared during posting. Anyway, the output is somewhat
"interesting". The test passes for me, and I get:
^done,name="fooPtr",numchild="3",value="0x0",type="Foo *",thread-id="1"
Note the "value" field that the test actually expects to find. Note also the thread-id
field that I believe should always be present on x86 these days. Are you sure you're
testing the right version of GDB?
- Volodya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-03-27 14:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-03-27 11:37 FAILs on x86? Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 11:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-03-27 12:15 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 12:23 ` Vladimir Prus
2008-03-27 12:33 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 12:55 ` Vladimir Prus
2008-03-27 13:29 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 13:40 ` Vladimir Prus
2008-03-27 13:51 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 14:19 ` Vladimir Prus
2008-03-27 12:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-03-27 12:48 ` Markus Deuling
2008-03-27 13:04 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox