From: Luis Machado via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
To: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.threads/killed-outside.exp with -m32
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 10:33:02 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <208b6e38-66f5-0395-62f7-9f122384a3a5@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210118114422.GA11394@delia>
I was looking at this test on aarch64-linux/x86_64-linux Ubuntu 20.04
and noticed inconsistent output. I'm trying to assess what is the best
course of action.
On 1/18/21 8:44 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When running test-case gdb.threads/killed-outside.exp with target board
> unix/-m32, we run into:
> ...
> (gdb) PASS: gdb.threads/killed-outside.exp: get pid of inferior
> Executing on target: kill -9 10969 (timeout = 300)
> spawn -ignore SIGHUP kill -9 10969^M
> continue^M
> Continuing.^M
> [Thread 0xf7cb4b40 (LWP 10973) exited]^M
> ^M
> Program terminated with signal SIGKILL, Killed.^M
> The program no longer exists.^M
> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.threads/killed-outside.exp: prompt after first continue
> ...
>
> Fix this by allowing this output.
>
> Tested on x86_64-linux.
>
> Any comments?
>
> Thanks,
> - Tom
I see the following output, most of the time:
Executing on target: kill -9 3742839 (timeout = 300)
spawn -ignore SIGHUP kill -9 3742839^M
continue^M
Continuing.^M
Unable to fetch general registers.: No such process.^M
(gdb) [Thread 0xfffff7e281e0 (LWP 3742842) exited]^M
^M
Program terminated with signal SIGKILL, Killed.^M
The program no longer exists.^M
FAIL: gdb.threads/killed-outside.exp: prompt after first continue (timeout)
But I also see the following with READ1:
Executing on target: kill -9 3743271 (timeout = 300)
spawn -ignore SIGHUP kill -9 3743271^M
continue^M
Continuing.^M
Unable to fetch general registers.: No such process.^M
(gdb) FAIL: gdb.threads/killed-outside.exp: prompt after first continue
Besides the messages not being the same, there is some odd inconsistency
with the prompt positioning compared to what you mentioned above.
Forcing scheduler-locking to on made the output consistent for both
cases, but I was left wondering if enabling scheduler-locking would
cause the bug to not be reproducible anymore.
Thoughts?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-13 13:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-18 11:44 Tom de Vries
2021-04-13 13:33 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches [this message]
2021-04-13 14:45 ` Pedro Alves
2021-04-13 15:51 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2021-04-13 17:50 ` Pedro Alves
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=208b6e38-66f5-0395-62f7-9f122384a3a5@linaro.org \
--to=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=luis.machado@linaro.org \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=tdevries@suse.de \
/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