From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 19:25:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111213191858.GA30724@host2.jankratochvil.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201112131801.20730.pedro@codesourcery.com>
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 19:01:20 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > Currently I run the testsuite already in multiple modes and some testcases run
> > in duplicate configurations that way, costing needless time+power=money.
>
> I'd be fine to restrict them to native runs (that's how Dan originally
> designed them),
If I change something in gdbserver I run just the testsuite in gdbserver mode.
If there is such restriction I would miss such change.
Moreover it seems overcomplicated to me to combine one mode into other modes.
I run FSF GDB HEAD now in 5 modes (default dwarf4-nogdbtypes dwarf4-gdbtypes
gdbindex gdbserver); in fact 15 modes (x86_64/x86_64-m32/i686), I will run it
in more modes soon. Finding fast what has regressed from which set of tests
has failed is already tricky as the testsuite already runs some tests in
different modes than expected.
According to my various "Regression" mails to gdb-patches you can see it is
already not enough to regression test GDB in a single mode only. So if one
has to run multiple modes they could be run really purely in their mode.
The same applies to PIE mode, if one debugs PIE code one runs the whole GDB
testsuite in PIE mode (there are still some bugs/incompletenesses in PIE...).
> and get back to this once we have better support for
> testing everything in extended-remote mode.
We will still need to test GDB in legacy mode for compatibility reasons with
non-FSF gdbservers and existing user setups of gdbserver. I do not see what
will change with adding the new extended-remote mode to the existing set of
modes required to be run.
> > As a less ambitious change if you do not like gdbserver_start_extended in this
> > testcase we can change it.
>
> That'd be my preference.
AFAIK there currently does not exist any extended-mode board file so there
does not make sense to check in a testcase requiring it.
> > But gdb.server/ext-*.exp do exactly the same so they have to be
> > changed all together.
>
> I disagree, they don't have to.
With http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/TestingGDB#Native_Board_File they both run
the server in extended mode.
There is a difference in default mode gdb.server/ext-*.exp also run it in
extended mode while this testcases runs in linux-nat mode in such case.
Our opinion probably differs in that I find running GDB testing only in the
default mode as insufficient.
Thanks,
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-13 19:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-05 16:46 Pedro Alves
2011-12-05 17:06 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-12-09 16:30 ` New tests to watch regions larger than a machine word (Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode) Pedro Alves
2011-12-09 19:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-12-13 16:12 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-05 21:24 ` [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-09 16:45 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-09 16:47 ` Tristan Gingold
2011-12-09 19:23 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-12-13 16:26 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-11 23:39 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 11:53 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-12 14:49 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 0:14 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 17:23 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-12 18:38 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 20:14 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 20:30 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-13 17:24 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-13 18:49 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-13 19:25 ` Jan Kratochvil [this message]
2011-12-16 16:16 ` Pedro Alves
2012-01-20 19:51 ` testsuite: native/non-extended/extended modes [Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode] Jan Kratochvil
2012-01-20 19:53 ` Pedro Alves
2012-01-20 19:57 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 20:34 ` [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode Pedro Alves
2011-12-12 21:39 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-13 16:21 ` Fix PR remote/13492 (Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode) Pedro Alves
2011-12-13 17:23 ` Fix PR remote/13492 Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-13 16:33 ` [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode Pedro Alves
2011-12-13 18:57 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-14 17:35 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-14 17:42 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-15 8:48 ` Regression for T (Stopped) processes [Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode] Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-15 12:44 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-15 15:33 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-13 22:27 ` [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode Jan Kratochvil
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111213191858.GA30724@host2.jankratochvil.net \
--to=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=pedro@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox