From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21411 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2014 12:32:40 -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 21402 invoked by uid 89); 23 Sep 2014 12:32:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:32:38 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8NCWYgv000858 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:32:34 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8NCWWho003846; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:32:33 -0400 Message-ID: <54216860.7060008@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:32:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kratochvil CC: Doug Evans , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: automated testing comment [Re: time to workaround libc/13097 in fsf gdb?] References: <5411CFAE.7040805@redhat.com> <20140912115452.GA5626@host2.jankratochvil.net> <5412E3AC.80203@redhat.com> <20140912123320.GA8704@host2.jankratochvil.net> <5412EB1F.40309@redhat.com> <20140917201049.GA22880@host2.jankratochvil.net> <541C3FCF.4000400@redhat.com> <541C409E.6010408@redhat.com> <20140920213033.GA6255@host2.jankratochvil.net> <541F2311.1040404@redhat.com> <20140923105855.GA10164@host2.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20140923105855.GA10164@host2.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg00682.txt.bz2 On 09/23/2014 11:58 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 21:12:17 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 09/20/2014 10:30 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: >>> But for example kernel-2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64 is "prelinked", see below. >> >> Ah, didn't know that. That's the sort of thing we should have in >> comments in the code, or at least in the commit log. > > That apparently would not work, comment is added only after the problem is > discovered. :-) Ah, OK. I thought that that was already the reason you didn't match the vDSO using AT_SYSINFO_EHDR in your original patch. > It would be found by automated testing upon submitting patch for reviews, such > as I have seen done through Jenkins connected to Gerrit. Or even after the patch is in, and we can revert if build / test bots find a problem. Seems like a simpler step that I don't think anyone would object to ... Seems like Jan-Benedict Glaw is running a buildbot that includes GDB: http://toolchain.lug-owl.de/buildbot/ No idea what system that runs on, and whether he runs the testsuite as well. Sergio was also interested in setting up a GDB build bot. There's the gcc compile farm too. > And sure deploying automated testing with the current GDB testsuite as is > would not work now automatically as the testsuite has fuzzy results. We should be able to filter those out though. Of course ideally we'd just fix them to not be fuzzy... > Although at least running new testcases (from the patch under review) would work which > would be sufficient in this case (but not in other cases - regression cases). Thanks, Pedro Alves