Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fernando Nasser <fnasser@cygnus.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl>,
	gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com, cagney@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] Testsuite addition for x86 linux GDB and SIGALRM fix
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 14:21:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B4A2056.4D58E307@cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3B3ABD6E.1040304@cygnus.com>

Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> Anyone?
> 
>         Andrew
> 
> > Here's the test I promised Andrew a while ago for the fix for the
> > problem reported by Jonathan Larmour:
> >
> >    http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb/2000-q1/msg00803.html
> >
> > The fix has already been checked in, the problem is still mentioned in
> > the TODO file (let's keep it there until this test has been added).
> >
> > I verified that some of these tests (the "stepi" and "nexti" tests)
> > do fail without my fix to infrun.c.
> >
> > I'm not sure to what extent the use of setitimer() is portable.
> > However, it is hard to come up with a test that doesn't use it.
> >
> >
> > 2000-05-20  Mark Kettenis  <kettenis@gnu.org>
> >
> > Add tests for stepping with pending signals.
> >       * gdb.base/step-alarm.exp: New file.
> >       * gdb.base/step-alarm.c: New file.
> >
> >

> > +        -re ".*${decimal}.*a.*5.*= a.*3.*$gdb_prompt $" { pass "step out 1" }
> > +        -re ".*${decimal}.*callee.*INTO.*$gdb_prompt $" { pass "step out 2" }

These should be just "step out"


> > +      fail "Can't run to main"
> > +      fail "Can't run to line 57"

> > +        pass "stepi: finish call 2"
> > +     fail "stepi: finish call 2"

These should just be "stepi: finish call"



W.r.t. the tests for HP and IA64 I sincerely regret that we do not have two commands: "finishi" and "finish".  The current behavior of "finish" (stop at the assembler instruction after the call) is very unsettling for someone who is doing source level debugging  --  in this case it should, after returning, single step until the end of the sourceline where the call is ("if it is not at the beginning of a source line after the return, single step to the end of it" would do).


Anyway, since we have such weird behavior, I agree that, in this specific case, we can accept both results as there is always a possibility that arbitrary targets will have extra instructions in a source line after the call instruction.



-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat - Toronto                       E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9


  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-07-09 14:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <200005192321.e4JNLEv13368@delius.kettenis.local>
2001-06-27 22:22 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-06-28 10:54   ` Michael Snyder
2001-07-09 14:21   ` Fernando Nasser [this message]
2001-07-09 14:34     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
     [not found]       ` <3B4A2C7C.85C688C4@cygnus.com>
2001-07-09 15:17         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-07-09 15:28           ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-25 16:11         ` Michael Snyder
2001-07-25 16:45           ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-25 18:48             ` Andrew Cagney
2001-07-26  7:14               ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-26  7:44                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-07-26  7:51                   ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-07-26  8:18                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-07-26  8:48                   ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-26  8:56                     ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-07-26 10:21                       ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-26 10:38                         ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-26 10:06                     ` Andrew Cagney
2001-07-26 10:24                       ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-26 10:45                         ` Andrew Cagney
2001-07-26 10:54                           ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-26  6:10             ` Michael Snyder
2001-07-26  7:14               ` Fernando Nasser
2001-07-26  7:45                 ` Michael Snyder
2001-07-26  7:51                   ` Fernando Nasser
     [not found] <200106281927.MAA29407@stanley.cygnus.com>
2001-06-28 12:41 ` Stan Shebs
2001-06-28 13:02 Michael Elizabeth Chastain

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=3B4A2056.4D58E307@cygnus.com \
    --to=fnasser@cygnus.com \
    --cc=ac131313@cygnus.com \
    --cc=cagney@cygnus.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com \
    --cc=kettenis@wins.uva.nl \
    /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