From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23304 invoked by alias); 27 Dec 2011 17:09:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 23293 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Dec 2011 17:09:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (83.163.83.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 17:08:49 +0000 Received: from glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pBRH8LC5026490; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 18:08:21 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.5/8.14.3/Submit) id pBRH8K1X019780; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 18:08:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 19:58:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201112271708.pBRH8K1X019780@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: brobecker@adacore.com CC: emachado@linux.vnet.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20111227164837.GI23376@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Tue, 27 Dec 2011 20:48:37 +0400) Subject: Re: [RFA] Ignore data minimal symbols for breakpoint linespecs References: <1324548943-26819-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <20111227041110.GA23376@adacore.com> <4EF9F1A1.2090302@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20111227164837.GI23376@adacore.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: 2011-12/txt/msg00846.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 20:48:37 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker > > > I noticed this patch unfortunately caused around 300 regressions in > > the testsuite running on ppc64, with failures in several testcases > > such as: > > Unfortunately, this is not a platform that I have access to, so > it's probably going to be hard for me to determine what the problem > is. > > Can you send me the logs of the tests that fail? Can you also > include a log of the same tests, but before the patch is applied. > (please, if possible, only include the testcases that regress) > > Perhaps we'll get lucky and the output will give us a clue. > Otherwise, I'll probably need a hand from you. Give that the target in question is 64-bit PowerPC, my bet is that by discarding data minimal symbols, you're also discarding function descriptors. That's probably not a good idea.