From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-78537-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 31551 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2011 17:58:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 31541 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Feb 2011 17:58:26 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com) (65.115.85.73)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:58:18 +0000
Received: from mailhost4.vmware.com (mailhost4.vmware.com [10.16.67.124])	by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54F0443009;	Tue, 22 Feb 2011 09:58:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com (promd-2s-dhcp138.eng.vmware.com [10.20.124.138])	by mailhost4.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493ECC9C97;	Tue, 22 Feb 2011 09:58:15 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D63F936.2000505@vmware.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:58:00 -0000
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
CC: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>,  "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>,  "dan@codesourcery.com" <dan@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA] add test for memattr, use get_number_or_range for memattr commands
References: <4D605267.8030708@vmware.com> <20110221091304.GB2600@adacore.com> <m3zkppsa69.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <4D62EE87.6040902@vmware.com> <20110222082747.GQ2600@adacore.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110222082747.GQ2600@adacore.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-02/txt/msg00604.txt.bz2

Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> 2011-02-21  Michael Snyder  <msnyder@vmware.com>
>>
>> 	* memattr.c (mem_enable_command): Use get_number_or_range.
>> 	(mem_disable_command): Ditto.
>> 	(mem_delete_command): Ditto.
>> 	(_initialize_mem): Tweak usage message to reflect multiple
>> 	arguments.
>>
>> 2011-02-21  Michael Snyder  <msnyder@vmware.com>
>>
>> 	* gdb.base/memattr.exp: New test.
>> 	* gdb.base/memattr.c: Test load for memattr.exp.
> 
> Overall, the patch looks OK to me.
> 
>> +gdb_test_multiple "info address mem1" "get address of mem1" {
>> +    -re "Symbol \"mem1\" is static storage at address ($hex).*$gdb_prompt $" {
>> +	set mem1start $expect_out(1,string)
>> +    }
>> +}
> [...]
>> +gdb_test_no_output "mem $mem1start $mem1end wo" "create mem region 1"
> 
> I still think that, if the first quoted test does not pass, the second
> will cause the testcase to crash because mem1start is going to be
> undefined. This is what you're going to see when that happens:
> 
>     ERROR: tcl error sourcing /[...]/memattr.exp
>     ERROR: can't read "mem1start": no such variable
>         while executing
>     "gdb_test_no_output "mem $mem1start $mem1end wo" "create mem region 1""
> 
> But I'm OK with that, if that's OK with the others.

Hmmm, how about if I initialize mem1start etc. to -1?
Then the rest of the tests will fail but not crash.
Is that better?