Re: [PATCH/RFC] gdb: tests: add support for testing FLAT toolchains

[Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>]

On Friday 01 July 2011 15:28:17, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 05:16, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > On Friday 01 July 2011 01:24:41, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> From: Jie Zhang <jie@codesourcery.com>
> >>
> >> FLAT toolchains output a FLAT binary for the named output and create
> >> another file with a .gdb suffix that is used for debugging.  So when
> >> testing a FLAT toolchain and we need to load up a file, use the .gdb.
> >
> > Sounds a lot like the recently added
> > lib/gdb.exp:exec_target_file/exec_symbol_file hooks?  We added them
> > to solve the exact same problem.  We then have this in our board file
> > for uclinux/flat toolchains:
> >
> >       proc exec_target_file { binfile } {
> >           return ${binfile}.flt
> >       }
> 
> probably ... this code does date back years ago, and when i poked
> things again one year ago, it still needed to be done.  i'll take a
> look at what you refer to now though.

I took another look at how we do things.  Those hooks I pointed at
are only part of the story, and are not enough for what you
need --- we _also_ override gdb_compile in our board files, calling
the existing version, and then doing the renaming very similarly to
what your patch does.

(What I've wondered before was if it was possible to pass enough
switches to the tools in order to have them output the files
with the names we need in the first place, in order to avoid the
renaming.)

I'm not super keen on having these target and environment pecularities
straight in the core testsuite code.  I'd rather we had enough
hooks to make it easy for a board file or a config file to do what
it needs to.  E.g., symbian toolchains also have separate binary
and symbol files (the reason shlib_target_file/shlib_symbol_file
were added a while ago, uppon which exec_target_file/exec_symbol_file
were later modelled on), and the extension is not .flt then,
of course.  Maybe we could do something like 
gdb/testsuite/config/gdbserver.exp/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdbserver-support.exp
instead?  That is, move your code to new gdb/testsuite/config/flt.exp
gdb/testsuite/lib/flt-support.exp files that do what you
have, but by overriding what needs overriding (gdb_compile
and the exec_*_file hooks mainly)?  WDYT?

-- 
Pedro Alves