Re: [pushed][PATCH 6/7] Extended-remote fork catch

[Don Breazeal <donb@codesourcery.com>]

On 5/14/2015 4:40 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14 2015, Don Breazeal wrote:
> 
>> The failures in gdb.base/foll-vfork.exp, gdb.base/multi-forks.exp, and
>> gdb.threads/fork-thread-pending.exp are not expected.
> 
> Hey Dan,
> 
> Well, because the GDB testsuite still has tests that fail intermitently,
> I was mostly talking about the failures on
> gdb.threads/fork-thread-pending.exp and gdb.base/foll-vfork.exp.
> 
>> The failures in gdb.threads/interrupted-hand-call.exp and
>> gdb.gdb/python-selftest.exp are failures that I saw intermittently in my
>> testing, and was able to reproduce on the mainline, as discussed here:
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-05/msg00180.html
> 
> Yeah, as Pedro already explained in this message, our testsuite is not
> entirely clean.  But a "New FAIL", in general, means that a regression
> has been introduced.
> 
>> The failure in gdb.base/attach.exp I don't know...the log doesn't
>> provide any clues.  I'll have to reproduce it to understand it.
> 
> Oh, this one is racy.  But if you're interested in following this up,
> you can get the logs here:
> 
>   <http://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/cgit>
> 
> You have to choose the repository with the same name as the builder you
> saw the failure, and then, inside it, you can look for a git tag
> containing the commit hash (from the upstream GDB repo) that triggered
> the failure.  Or, if you have the message from gdb-testers, you can see
> the direct link to the logs in the "Testsuite log (gdb.sum and gdb.log)
> URL(s):" field.
> 
>> Disappointing.  I'll check out a clean sandbox and see if I can
>> reproduce any of these results.
> 
> Thanks for looking into this.  As I said, I think the priority should be
> the new failures on gdb.threads/fork-thread-pending.exp and
> gdb.base/foll-vfork.exp.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
Hi Sergio,
Just to close the loop on this: the new failures that you reported in
gdb.threads/fork-thread-pending.exp and gdb.base/foll-vfork.exp should
have now been addressed by the following three patches:

https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-05/msg00696.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-05/msg00697.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-05/msg00698.html

Thanks
--Don