From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 96802 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2015 21:07:38 -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 96793 invoked by uid 89); 12 Aug 2015 21:07:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS 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; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 21:07:37 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-06.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.120]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1ZPdFF-0004ub-73 from Luis_Gustavo@mentor.com ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:07:33 -0700 Received: from [172.30.12.5] (147.34.91.1) by SVR-ORW-FEM-06.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.224.2; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:07:32 -0700 Message-ID: <55CBB590.8040606@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 21:07:00 -0000 From: Luis Machado Reply-To: Luis Machado User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: Pedro Alves , , Sergio Durigan Junior Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/18] All-stop on top of non-stop References: <1432250354-2721-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <55C4E3BD.8040801@redhat.com> <20150812183208.GA24901@adacore.com> <55CB9907.9080506@redhat.com> <20150812202600.GA9183@adacore.com> <55CBAD06.4090707@codesourcery.com> <20150812205002.GI22245@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20150812205002.GI22245@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg00330.txt.bz2 On 08/12/2015 05:50 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> My idea of a testcase comment is at the beginning of the testcase file, >> explaining what the test does and why it does it. I'd mention the amd64 >> example as well, since it is part of why the test was created in the first >> place. >> >> That should give others enough background to pursue an investigation about >> why this potentially fails for them. >> >> My 2 cents anyway. > > There is this perception that the testcase was created because > of the issue on amd64, but that's not true. The testcase was > created, albeit in AdaCore's infrastructure only, to test that > "next" in that context works as expected. Only later on did it > allow us to find another bug which actually has nothing to do > with the initial reason for creating the testcase. I hope I'm not > looking like I'm splitting hair, but I feel like there is a bit > of a misunderstanding somewhere, probably because the testcase > appears as new to the GDB community and was combined with an > amd64-specific fix. > What caused confusion was the fact that the test was sent together with a fix, which seemed to imply it was a fix-specific test as opposed to a testcase-less fix and a generic new testcase in the same patch. > That being said, I propose the attached patch. I confess I'm not > super convinced about the comment on amd64, as I think it might > become one day irrelevant. But I don't mind it that much; if > it is helpful to others... The description looks good. Feel free to drop the amd64 reference if you think it is not worth it. I don't have a strong opinion on it. It just felt like the testcase needed a bit more information on why it was created in the first place.