From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id UPqTIYJaoF8WGAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 14:14:10 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 8316C1F08B; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:14:10 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 028C01E58D for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:14:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 653043894C16; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:14:09 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 653043894C16 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1604344449; bh=NwWrbwREVv94kclkpa76EuqggqJkhy/X28KxFdp+1JM=; h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=gag6fEVaw7UkpdYORBJm8XywTIi8Wu3/bEf9YzD+pPhAniTgxqwv/QfJSQfSprNGc c5V2UHQVvj/myhNu3yfCTjiL+tyk+P3hjYjHyPMAROSQvj9Ob/lsrhys88/q6mPNmr 3/buDDh7CczgJSmILBAdlwtrks91+AuWaTaCYAVA= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CAC7385802D for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:14:07 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 1CAC7385802D Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-522-FlT2hG_vPq6lV8hMx88CrA-1; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 14:14:04 -0500 X-MC-Unique: FlT2hG_vPq6lV8hMx88CrA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B150064174; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:14:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blade.nx (ovpn-115-15.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.115.15]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8344A73676; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:14:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blade.nx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7F4C1816CD2E; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:14:02 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 19:14:02 +0000 To: Andreas Schwab Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix gdb.dwarf2/clztest.exp with Clang Message-ID: <20201102191402.GA6162@blade.nx> References: <1604336929-1338-1-git-send-email-gbenson@redhat.com> <87pn4vzlvt.fsf@igel.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87pn4vzlvt.fsf@igel.home> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Gary Benson via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Gary Benson Cc: Gary Benson via Gdb-patches Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Nov 02 2020, Gary Benson via Gdb-patches wrote: > > diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/clztest.S b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/clztest.S > > index a904fee..08a8bac 100644 > > --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/clztest.S > > +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/clztest.S > > @@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ > > > > */ > > > > +#if defined(__clang__) > > +# define EH_FRAME_SH_FLAGS "a" > > +#else > > +# define EH_FRAME_SH_FLAGS "aw" > > +#endif > > + > > .file "clztest.c" > > .text > > .Ltext0: > > @@ -178,7 +184,7 @@ _start: > > .LEFDE4: > > #NO_APP > > #APP > > - .section .eh_frame,"aw",@progbits > > + .section .eh_frame,EH_FRAME_SH_FLAGS,@progbits > > Shouldn't .eh_frame always be read-only? I don't know. > It certainly is when compiled with gcc. A comment in that .S file indicated it was originally generated using GCC (via gcc -dA -S -g -O2 clztest.c -o clztest.S) but that was 2011, so maybe things changed. I'm happy to change the test to have .eh_frame read-only for all compilers, if that seems more correct. Thanks, Gary -- Gary Benson - he / him / his Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat