Re: [PATCH][gdb] Fix hang after ext sigkill

[Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>]

On 4/21/20 2:38 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>> +
>>> +set no_such_process_msg "Couldn't get registers: No such process\."
>>> +set killed_msg "Program terminated with signal SIGKILL, Killed\."
>>> +set no_longer_exists_msg "The program no longer exists\."
>>> +set not_being_run_msg "The program is not being run\."
>>> +
>>> +gdb_test_multiple "continue" "prompt after first continue" {
>>> +    -re "Continuing\.\r\n\r\n$killed_msg\r\n$no_longer_exists_msg\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
>>> +	pass $gdb_test_name
>>> +	# Regular output, bug condition was not triggered, we're done.
>>> +	return -1
>>> +    }
>>> +    -re "Continuing\.\r\n$no_such_process_msg\r\n$no_such_process_msg\r\n$gdb_prompt " {
>>> +	pass $gdb_test_name
>>> +	# Two times $no_such_process_msg.  The bug condition was triggered, go
>>> +	# check for it.
>>> +    }
>>> +    -re "Continuing\.\r\n$no_such_process_msg\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
>>> +	pass $gdb_test_name
>>> +	# One time $no_such_process_msg.  We're stuck here.  The bug condition
>>> +	# was not triggered, but we're not getting correct gdb behaviour either:
>>> +	# every subsequent continue produces one no_such_process_msg.  Give up.
>>> +	return -1
>> I'm confused here -- the comment says we're not getting correct behavior,
>> but this won't result in any FAIL?
>>
> Um, yes. I made that decision because I was trying to trigger another
> scenario. But agreed, it's debatable. Anyway, it also doesn't matter
> anymore since rewriting the test to stop at a breakpoint eliminated the
> need for this. The scenario I was trying to trigger now always reproduces.
> 

I actually ran into the "One time $no_such_process_msg." scenario again,
filed at https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26664 .

Thanks,
- Tom