Re: [patch] New thread test to exercise Daniel's Patch

[Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 03:18:35PM -0500, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> 
>>Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 01:06:07PM -0500, Jeff Johnston wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>+send_gdb "continue\n"
>>>>>>+gdb_expect {
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Everywhere you're using gdb_expect, please use gdb_test_multiple
>>>>>instead.  For the "after" tests, you can use gdb_test_multiple with
>>>>>"" as the first argument.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I tried this initially but I kept getting "Error: internal buffer is 
>>>>full". I tried lowering the "after" time which is why it ended up 100 
>>>>below but that didn't solve the problem.  Any suggestions on how to avoid 
>>>>the "full_buffer" error.
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm not sure about the regexes, since I'm just pulling this out of the
>>>top of my head, but you want something like this:
>>>
>>> -re "error:.*$gdb_prompt $" {
>>>   fail "msg"
>>> }
>>> -re "\\\[New thread \[^\]\]*\\\]\r\n" {
>>>   exp_continue
>>> }
>>> -re "\\\[Thread \[^\]\]* exited\\\]\r\n" {
>>>   exp_continue
>>> }
>>>
>>>That will consume any thread create/delete messages, instead of leaving
>>>them in the buffer.
>>>
>>
>>Forgive my ignorance of the test macros, but how does this terminate?  I 
>>tried doing it this way and it hangs.  It never gets a gdb prompt and spits 
>>out endless messages because it is essentially an infinite loop.  I only 
>>care to see the "Continuing" message and don't care about the rest of the 
>>stuff.
>>
>>I stole the original send_gdb / gdb_expect code from schedlock.exp which 
>>has the same problem.
> 
> 
> Hmm, I must have misunderstood.  Which part of the test gives you a
> full buffer error?  I'm thinking of something like this:
> 
> gdb_test_multiple "continue" {
>   -re "error:.*$gdb_prompt $" {
>     fail "msg"
>   }
>   -re "Continuing" {
>     pass "msg"
>   }
> }
> 
> after 1000 { send_gdb "\003" }
> gdb_test_multiple "" {
>   -re "error:.*$gdb_prompt $" {
>     fail "msg"
>   }
>   -re "$gdb_prompt $" {
>     pass "msg"
>   }
>   -re "\\\[New thread \[^\]\]*\\\]\r\n" {
>     exp_continue
>   }
>   -re "\\\[Thread \[^\]\]* exited\\\]\r\n" {
>     exp_continue
>   }
> }
> 
> Those will catch any error messages and treat them as failures.
> 

Ok, I had the thread checks in the Continue test.  If I change it to the way 
above, now I get 3 "Process no longer exists "messages but the test completes. :(

I'm really starting to hate these test macros.  What is the reasoning behind 
avoiding send_gdb / gdb_expect?

-- Jeff J.