From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27614 invoked by alias); 17 Jul 2008 18:58:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 27606 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jul 2008 18:58:27 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:58:07 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7825D98373; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:58:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A048982C3; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:58:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KJYg0-0007ui-0z; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:58:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:58:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Paul Pluzhnikov Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix for failing gdb.base/corefile.exp on Linux Message-ID: <20080717185803.GA29704@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Pluzhnikov , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20080717183535.CF6C33A67B6@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080717183535.CF6C33A67B6@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-07/txt/msg00342.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:35:35AM -0700, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > Greetings, > > (Some?) Linux kernels do not write out unmodified mmaped regions, > which causes gdb.base/corefile.exp to fail: > > Running ../../../src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/corefile.exp ... > FAIL: gdb.base/corefile.exp: accessing mmapped data in core file (mapping address not found in core file) > > Attached patch fixes that. > Ok to commit? Thanks. The only reason I haven't fixed this so far is that I've reported it twice to the kernel developers and gotten general agreement that it's a bug. But they still haven't changed anything. I've just re-reported it to the kernel.org bugzilla (bug 11110), so it won't get totally lost. So your patch is OK. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery