From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32649 invoked by alias); 3 Jul 2014 06:46:23 -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 32586 invoked by uid 89); 3 Jul 2014 06:46:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Jul 2014 06:46:16 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1X2amb-0005Ph-5S from Yao_Qi@mentor.com for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 23:46:13 -0700 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-03.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.39]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 2 Jul 2014 23:46:13 -0700 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-03.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.39) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 23:46:12 -0700 Message-ID: <53B4FBE6.20505@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 06:46:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: , "'gdb-patches@sourceware.org'" Subject: Re: [RFC] gdb.base/frame-args.exp References: <53B26994.8000306@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <53B26994.8000306@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg00043.txt.bz2 On 07/01/2014 03:56 PM, Luis Machado wrote: > So it looks like we are taking a different route and GDB ends up > catching an error before displaying the optimized out information, thus > not matching what the testcase expects. > > I could add a different pattern to the testcase and that would solve the > couple failures i see, but i wonder if we should tweak the testcase to > dodge optimizations? Hi Luis, Andrew Burgess had a patch changing "" to "" in this thread, PATCH: error reading variable: value has been optimized out https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-08/msg00715.html so I think "" is the right direction to go. We should fix gdb rather than update test case to match the current output, IMO. -- Yao (齐尧)