From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11789 invoked by alias); 20 Jun 2013 16:06:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 11765 invoked by uid 89); 20 Jun 2013 16:06:20 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 16:06:20 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r5KG6JNu011633 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 12:06:19 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r5KG6HDJ021860; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 12:06:18 -0400 Message-ID: <51C32879.1080004@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 16:19:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130514 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] first batch of test suite updates References: <1371675821-9959-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1371675821-9959-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00545.txt.bz2 On 06/19/2013 10:03 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > I've been working on a long-term project to fully parallelize the gdb > test suite. The end goal is that it should be possible to run each > .exp file in parallel. Looking forward. > This project has many parts; and the full patch is not quite finished > (and is also very large). I wanted to start sending out some of the > more straightforward changes, mostly so that I wouldn't have to > constantly rebase them. I think these changes are reasonable in their > own right. Agreed. > > This series holds all the "easy" conversions from gdb.base. This is > just straightforward changes to use standard_testfile and > standard_output_file, plus also prepare_for_testing or clean_restart > as well. > > This series fixes a few spots where .exp files did not interact well. > For example, cases where the tests used the same executable name. > > This regression tests cleanly; however since some file names changed > there are a few minor output changes: > > Missing tests: > gdb.base/corefile.exp: args: -core=coremaker.core: PASS > gdb.base/corefile.exp: args: execfile -core=coremaker.core: PASS > gdb.base/info-proc.exp: core break.gcore: PASS > > New tests: > gdb.base/corefile.exp: args: -core=corefile.core: PASS > gdb.base/corefile.exp: args: execfile -core=corefile.core: PASS > gdb.base/default.exp: set the history filename: PASS > gdb.base/info-proc.exp: core info-proc.gcore: PASS > > I don't consider this to be a problem. Agreed. > > I split the patch up into 7 roughly equal-sized pieces based on file > name. > > After this series, gdb.base is still not parallel-clean. There are > some lurking "trickier" cases I omitted from this series, as they > depend on new testsuite/lib infrastructure. I plan to work through > all the easy/obvious bits first, before starting to upstream that > stuff. I think I saw places in the context of the patches that could be made to use build_executable instead of gdb_compile, and didn't look tricky, but, this is all good forward progress as is! Thanks a lot for doing this. I tried skimming the series, but got extremely bored after patch #1. :-) I'm all for this. -- Pedro Alves