From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13253 invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2013 13:27:39 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 13243 invoked by uid 89); 11 Sep 2013 13:27:39 -0000 Received: from service87.mimecast.com (HELO service87.mimecast.com) (91.220.42.44) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:27:39 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: service87.mimecast.com Received: from cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com (fw-tnat.cambridge.arm.com [217.140.96.21]) by service87.mimecast.com; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:27:34 +0100 Received: from e103625-lin.cambridge.arm.com ([10.1.255.212]) by cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:27:33 +0100 Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:27:00 -0000 From: Vidya Praveen To: Yao Qi Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Test case for entry values. Message-ID: <20130911132733.GA4871@e103625-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1376379586-24150-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1376379586-24150-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <5220B1B6.2000304@arm.com> <20130830152927.GC9666@e103625-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <52213712.1030700@codesourcery.com> <20130910153019.GA2535@e103625-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <522FAE9C.2000206@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <522FAE9C.2000206@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-MC-Unique: 113091114273406901 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-09/txt/msg00353.txt.bz2 On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 12:43:24AM +0100, Yao Qi wrote: > On 09/10/2013 11:30 PM, Vidya Praveen wrote: > > OK. But isn't it better to have the condition (!gdb_target_supports_tra= ce) > > that checks if the target supports tracing, in the beginning of the test > > rather than much later? >=20 > This part of test is about testing entry values, and the bottom part=20 > (added by patch 2/2) is about testing unavailable entry values when=20 > examining trace frames. This part is not related to tracing, so we=20 > can't use gdb_target_supports_trace to check. >=20 > See my description in "PATCH 0/2" >=20 > > Patch 1/2 is to generate dwarf using Dwarf Assembler to test "entry val= ues" > > are shown correctly. At this point, gdb.trace/entry-values.exp is still > > a dwarf test, nothing to do with trace. Patch 2/2 is to use tracepoint, > > to collect data, to test what happen when argument is available and ent= ry > > value is not. >=20 > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-08/msg00327.html However, it scans for the 'call' instruction regardless of the target. Thou= gh your comment explains it, the test is still target specific. It should check for the target before scanning for 'call' and not assume the $sp for all=20 targets except for those you already check. Regards VP