From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3055 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2010 18:09:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 3047 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Feb 2010 18:09:51 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:09:48 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72B852BAC2F; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:09:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id EoCXqGltlPav; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:09:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29A562BAC4D; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:09:46 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9607AF5896; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:09:45 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:09:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey Subject: Re: RFA: valgrind and the test suite, take 2 Message-ID: <20100219180945.GG2779@adacore.com> References: <201002191745.18600.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201002191745.18600.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-02/txt/msg00496.txt.bz2 > > This patch adds support for valgrind to the test suite. Unlike my last > > patch along these lines, this one adds value above just setting GDB. > > Couldn't this be done with a board file? It seems to be that it would be much more convenient to just be able to defined VALGRIND to activate this feature. board files are the only way we have to provide setup-specific information (such as target name, etc), but the stuff to get testing under valgrind should be the same for everyone... Similarly, I have always found unfortunate that gdb.reverse testing is conditioned on a setting that gets set in a board file. As a result of this, I have never run the gdb.reverse testcases even though I could have done so on my laptop. -- Joel