From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11276 invoked by alias); 12 Sep 2014 14:21:55 -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 11263 invoked by uid 89); 12 Sep 2014 14:21:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-wg0-f51.google.com Received: from mail-wg0-f51.google.com (HELO mail-wg0-f51.google.com) (74.125.82.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 14:21:52 +0000 Received: by mail-wg0-f51.google.com with SMTP id k14so801808wgh.22 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:21:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.78.100 with SMTP id a4mr11309450wjx.106.1410531705703; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:21:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.102] (bl21-175-225.dsl.telepac.pt. [2.82.175.225]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id lu12sm1942618wic.4.2014.09.12.07.21.43 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <54130176.1070208@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 14:21:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: Edjunior Barbosa Machado , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand , Sergio Durigan Junior Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PR tdep/17379] Fix internal-error when stack pointer is invalid References: <1410490007-19756-1-git-send-email-emachado@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <5412C3F0.9000703@redhat.com> <20140912130051.GA4871@adacore.com> <5412F714.3040500@redhat.com> <20140912135012.GC4871@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20140912135012.GC4871@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg00405.txt.bz2 On 09/12/2014 02:50 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> We still need to use gdb_run_cmd to cover remote testing, >> so that'd be: >> >> gdb_test "" "Program received signal SIGSEGV.*" "run until SIGSEGV" >> >> ISTR that gdb_test doesn't allow empty command, but I may well >> be mistaken. And if it doesn't, maybe it should. > > This is me pretending that I had noticed that the command was empty > and knowing that this was still OK :-). But once you mentioned it, > I knew I had already done something like that. See gdb.ada/bp_reset.exp: > > gdb_run_cmd > gdb_test "" "Breakpoint $decimal, foo\\.nested_sub \\(\\).*" > > Doing a quick grep, we have a number of occurences where we use > an empty command when calling gdb_test. And looking at gdb_test's > implementation, it just passes the first argument to gdb_test_multiple, > so it should indeed be equivalent. (phew, that was close! ;-)). :-) I'm writing a test that converts all gdb_run_cmd -> gdb_expect cases to avoid this from spreading further. Thanks, Pedro Alves