From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: palves@redhat.com
Cc: sergiodj@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org,
tromey@redhat.com, jan.kratochvil@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Adjust `pc-fp.exp' for ppc64/s390x (PR 12659)
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:57:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201208081157.q78BvGVv006049@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5018ECBE.4020007@redhat.com> (message from Pedro Alves on Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:50 +0100)
> Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:50 +0100
> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
>
> On 07/31/2012 10:25 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
> > While regtesting 7.4 against 7.5 branch on ppc64/s390x RHEL 6.3, I
> > noticed this failure. The patch which introduced this failure was
> > committed because of:
> >
> > http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12659
> >
> > On x86*, the output of `info register pc fp' is:
> >
> > info register pc fp
> > pc: 0x400520
> > fp: 0x7fffffffc490
> > (gdb) PASS: gdb.base/pc-fp.exp: info register pc fp
> >
> > On ppc64/s390x, it is:
> >
> > info register pc fp
> > pc 0x10000658 0x10000658 <main+20>
> > fp: 0xfffffffd120
> > (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/pc-fp.exp: info register pc fp
> >
> > Since this difference in the output does not seem to be an error itself,
> > the patch below just adjusts the testcase to match this kind of output
> > as well. It does not fail on x86*.
>
> Why is the output format different? It looks like consistency here
> would be good.
Indeed. So I'd say patching up the testsuite for this difference
would be the wrong way to go.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-08 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-31 21:26 Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-07-31 23:29 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-08-01 3:06 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-08-01 9:22 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-08-01 8:46 ` Pedro Alves
2012-08-01 19:41 ` Ulrich Weigand
2012-08-01 19:47 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-08-01 20:20 ` info registers output Pedro Alves
2012-08-01 20:49 ` Ulrich Weigand
2012-08-01 20:55 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-08-27 17:41 ` Pedro Alves
2012-08-28 0:41 ` Ulrich Weigand
2012-08-28 9:07 ` Pedro Alves
2012-08-01 19:52 ` [PATCH] Adjust `pc-fp.exp' for ppc64/s390x (PR 12659) Tom Tromey
2012-08-01 20:23 ` Pedro Alves
2012-08-01 20:49 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-08-01 21:44 ` Pedro Alves
2012-08-01 22:03 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-08-01 23:40 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-08-02 9:06 ` Pedro Alves
2012-08-02 20:38 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-08-08 11:57 ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
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=201208081157.q78BvGVv006049@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl \
--to=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=sergiodj@redhat.com \
--cc=tromey@redhat.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