From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27248 invoked by alias); 12 Dec 2014 19:00:25 -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 27228 invoked by uid 89); 12 Dec 2014 19:00:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 19:00:20 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-06.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.120]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1XzVRp-0002S0-Hx from Don_Breazeal@mentor.com for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 11:00:17 -0800 Received: from [172.30.2.31] (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-06.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Fri, 12 Dec 2014 11:00:16 -0800 Message-ID: <548B3B3B.5060709@codesourcery.com> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 19:00:00 -0000 From: "Breazeal, Don" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Qi, Yao" , "Breazeal, Don" CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Skipping tests that use remote protocol References: <1418344896-9036-1-git-send-email-donb@codesourcery.com> <877fxxzhmx.fsf@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <877fxxzhmx.fsf@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-12/txt/msg00293.txt.bz2 On 12/11/2014 7:11 PM, Qi, Yao wrote: > Don Breazeal writes: > >> Other procedures are also used that don't really check the right thing. >> >> * isnative checks the build triplet against the target triplet. >> >> * gdb_is_target_remote and target_is_gdbserver don't differentiate between >> remote and extended-remote. Both require GDB to be running, which makes >> using them to skip a test less efficient than a procedure that uses info >> from the target board config file. >> >> * target_info use_gdb_stub is used in lib/gdb.exp to explicitly determine >> if a target is remote and not extended-remote. >> >> If we reach consensus on this approach I'll follow up with patches to >> convert other tests to use these procedures instead of is_remote, >> isnative, and so on. > > Does "![isnative] || [is_remote host] || [target_info exists use_gdb_stub]" > work for you? It is used in some attach related tests. > Hm. This would work for my attach example, but I don't think that this check is sufficient for all cases (e.g. gdb.base/catch-syscall.exp, which we want to skip for both "remote" and "extended-remote" on Linux). [target_info exists use_gdb_stub] alone would work for the attach tests, which we want to skip for remote but run for extended-remote. This (use_gdb_stub) seems to be equivalent to my new proc [gdb_using_remote_protocol], meaning "using gdbserver/stub" and protocol == "remote". The name use_gdb_stub is misleading, since it is only set for the remote protocol and not the extended protocol. Things go wrong in lib/gdb.exp if you set use_gdb_stub and run extended-mode tests. If we put aside the fact that we can control the results of is_remote by setting the variable isremote in the board file, then [isnative] and [is_remote] don't provide the information we really need. In the example above they are checking whether build!=target and build!=host, respectively. That doesn't cover all the cases, e.g. if build != target and build != host, we don't know for sure whether target == host. We can set isremote in the board files, as in native-gdbserver.exp, to control what is_remote returns. But checking if we are using gdbserver or a stub is not the purpose of is_remote, and trying to use it in general for that could have negative side-effects (e.g. to gcc tests). My conclusion from all of this is that we should never use isnative or is_remote to decide whether to skip tests for remote targets. The two new proc's are testing the specific conditions that affect the remote tests. We could use [target_info exists use_gdb_stub] in place of [gdb_using_remote_protocol], but the name may be misleading. What do you think? In any case I'd like this discussion to result in a standard approach for skipping remote tests for each of the relevant cases. Thanks! --Don