From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24602 invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2008 10:44:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 24594 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jun 2008 10:44:33 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:44:01 +0000 Received: (qmail 3011 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2008 10:43:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wind.local) (vladimir@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 28 Jun 2008 10:43:59 -0000 From: Vladimir Prus To: Daniel Jacobowitz Subject: Re: [MI/RFC] Emit ^running via observer. Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 11:34:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: Nick Roberts , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200806140108.24047.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <200806261958.06374.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <20080626160309.GA17512@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20080626160309.GA17512@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200806281443.57315.vladimir@codesourcery.com> 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: 2008-06/txt/msg00533.txt.bz2 On Thursday 26 June 2008 20:03:09 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 07:58:05PM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > On Thursday 26 June 2008 07:20:14 Nick Roberts wrote: > > > > I've checked in the following, which differs from original by extra test > > > > strictness. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > Further, I've converted mi-async.exp to use the helper > > > > functions. Nick, as it stands now it does not seem that mi-async.exp tests > > > > async behaviour at all -- it merely changes that we get ^running for CLI > > > > commands, and we get that in both sync and async mode. Do you think it > > > > worthwhile to rename the test or move its content somewhere else? > > > > > > The tests appear to fail now. > > > > Which tests? With unmodified CVS state, all MI tests pass for me both in sync > > and async mode. But indeed, if I make mi-async.exp not force async mode, it > > starts to fail.... > > Not for me. > > (gdb) > start > &"start\n" > ~"Temporary breakpoint 1 at 0x400635: file /space/fsf/commit/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c, line 62.\n" > ~"Starting program: /space/fsf/x86-64/commit-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics \n" > =thread-created,id="1" > ^running > *running,thread-id="all" > *stopped,reason="breakpoint-hit",disp="del",bkptno="1",thread-id="1",frame={addr="0x0000000000400635",func="main",args=[],file="/space/fsf/commit/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c",fullname="/space/fsf/commit/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c",line="62"} > FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-async.exp: start: send The test expects (gdb) after *running. I don't actually understand how it can not be output -- the command is handled by mi_execute_command, which prints prompts at the end. Ah wait, except for this early exit path: if (args.action == EXECUTE_COMMAND_SUPPRESS_PROMPT) /* The command is executing synchronously. Bail out early suppressing the finished prompt. */ return; and then: ==20541== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) ==20541== at 0x80DCD38: mi_execute_command (mi-main.c:1138) I'll fix this shortly -- one way or another. - Volodya