From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id ebPQH2H0QWHHYwAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:25:53 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7192F1EE25; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:25:53 -0400 (EDT) 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 A3D0A1EDF7 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:25:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24C303858422 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:25:52 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 24C303858422 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1631712352; bh=MWFW2LRWcWdQ3WCNaFX0yPrQKvV4QfPYH2IP0hCOMlo=; h=Date:To:Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:From; b=gQPyfz2KTT6q7RS+v5SZ2TwKlmLZALP8EA7RnulNeKWQUA+rLI6lYJL20TksN7yhW BmCel7M2EzXocwDQRSB0nzzWYcRlIIoeqYSAqpuW9DXpVt7/VkwOSuE7xvG3vpkts5 4JIhrYDn+kqVUZj6TpkovAVx8MkC/chetOWhORtY= Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DF663858413 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:25:33 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 4DF663858413 Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81F05201A1; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A89413C37; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id KFXxGEz0QWGkXgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:25:32 +0000 Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:25:30 +0200 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.guile/scm-type.exp with gcc 4.8 Message-ID: <20210915132528.GA29670@delia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) 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: Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Tom de Vries Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Hi, With gcc 7.5.0, I get: ... (gdb) guile (print (type-range (field-type (type-field (value-type \ (value-dereference f)) "items"))))^M = (0 0)^M (gdb) PASS: gdb.guile/scm-type.exp: lang_cpp: test_range: \ on flexible array member: $cmd ... but with gcc 4.8.5, I get instead: ... (gdb) guile (print (type-range (field-type (type-field (value-type \ (value-dereference f)) "items"))))^M = (0 -1)^M (gdb) FAIL: gdb.guile/scm-type.exp: lang_cpp: test_range: \ on flexible array member: $cmd ... There's a difference in debug info. With gcc 4.8.5, we have: ... <2><224>: Abbrev Number: 15 (DW_TAG_member) <225> DW_AT_name : items <22b> DW_AT_type : <0x231> <1><231>: Abbrev Number: 4 (DW_TAG_array_type) <232> DW_AT_type : <0x105> <2><23a>: Abbrev Number: 16 (DW_TAG_subrange_type) <23b> DW_AT_type : <0x11a> <23f> DW_AT_upper_bound : 0xffffffffffffffff ... and with gcc 7.5.0, we have instead: ... <2><89f>: Abbrev Number: 12 (DW_TAG_member) <8a0> DW_AT_name : items <8a6> DW_AT_type : <0x8ac> <1><8ac>: Abbrev Number: 17 (DW_TAG_array_type) <8ad> DW_AT_type : <0x29d> <2><8b5>: Abbrev Number: 41 (DW_TAG_subrange_type) <2><8b6>: Abbrev Number: 0 ... As mentioned in commit 858c8f2c1b9 "gdb/testsuite: adjust gdb.python/flexible-array-member.exp expected pattern": ... Ideally, GDB would present a consistent and documented value for an array member declared with size 0, regardless of how the debug info looks like. ... As in gdb.python/flexible-array-member.exp, change the test to accept the two values. Tested on x86_64-linux. Any comments? Thanks, - Tom [gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.guile/scm-type.exp with gcc 4.8 --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-type.exp | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-type.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-type.exp index ccde98ca224..e5eaab365cc 100644 --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-type.exp +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-type.exp @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ proc test_range {} { gdb_scm_test_silent_cmd "guile (define f (history-ref 0))" \ "get value (f) from history" gdb_test "guile (print (type-range (field-type (type-field (value-type (value-dereference f)) \"items\"))))" \ - "= \\(0 0\\)" + "= \\(0 (0|-1)\\)" gdb_test "guile (print (value-subscript (value-field (value-dereference f) \"items\") 0))" \ "= 111" gdb_test "guile (print (value-subscript (value-field (value-dereference f) \"items\") 1))" \