From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id uDOhA50ko2LLIQEAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 07:01:49 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 024FA1E223; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 07:01:49 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=lrw4W6Fm; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A1AB1E220 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 07:01:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19897382B27B for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 11:01:48 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 19897382B27B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1654858908; bh=Gk8OxelXaqKdKjj+xD2Q3NTZo7FwMxzxwTeDh9hpVnU=; h=To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=lrw4W6FmF7y4paftTZizb1+9ao94it78YzZDpDzWuJRZfbv2CdduUx/JLaItF24By AhSQx2/G0RHF8VesqR+DANthxOW0WHX8qUxE/WHaL34ArnN6IJbHQK5rKUCdVR4D02 HUwbuahMM8Rqx+fZ1DK1IhFbEyvKtbY/isCChBG8= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE7DC383864A for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 11:01:28 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org CE7DC383864A Received: from mail-wm1-f71.google.com (mail-wm1-f71.google.com [209.85.128.71]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-97-QSYheUSbOt216iW5j3spIw-1; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 07:01:27 -0400 X-MC-Unique: QSYheUSbOt216iW5j3spIw-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f71.google.com with SMTP id l4-20020a05600c1d0400b0039c60535405so3555601wms.6 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 04:01:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=Gk8OxelXaqKdKjj+xD2Q3NTZo7FwMxzxwTeDh9hpVnU=; b=uLDDEj/rCkg3hgwRhQPnRxoSnhySrdVlfYKL2xntR304a/5x/SdcJqf8UOH8ic9woC J1PAvHKkoAixGE894bsZ7VRK1MviY4aaYdC+gJBZdDL3GtXcbG/wOdHxUjUS1oSa/br8 oXwUM80dgOjgeWjv9zA6YgeMv6oyOKtedhLDbm4w47PKAHmlycdKqGcCauH7OjPYh9OD MLbtWn4WyI6ijRaDrW1rIsWlM2rQFAAO7MUQA4fyCPAxRsrEsM+82BaAJX+87PKEg/B5 b8amdTYi/y4nbj6cpSNGikEStcbO1o8YOF2Xs1ddRnu5jnWzMVOqKwqBjPGUzOWOV+Jl //PA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532AE+F3fYjlC6BM179ijgACOo8PW49os4DpN16uC6L/mYlpDHxE 5DCR7ZFjNhxi3VS4g9dsOkRrqWYPofpjai51a8VkOcJd5SLBVf0paHWH+JR2Lz2hWF6UV24U5jz j3E7aYSwpM5ebjoWqrs43Og== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:648a:0:b0:217:3552:eb2d with SMTP id o10-20020a5d648a000000b002173552eb2dmr30339061wri.78.1654858886314; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 04:01:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyzYodVw5ipy+VWDus6mYpQU8JhyejEpdRakXP1tS0cwX4GJfrzvaFqWGCumkUbgMGvrpzcww== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:648a:0:b0:217:3552:eb2d with SMTP id o10-20020a5d648a000000b002173552eb2dmr30339031wri.78.1654858886019; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 04:01:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (host109-152-215-36.range109-152.btcentralplus.com. [109.152.215.36]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n123-20020a1c2781000000b0039c63f4bce0sm2628358wmn.12.2022.06.10.04.01.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Jun 2022 04:01:25 -0700 (PDT) To: Bruno Larsen , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 03/14] change gdb.base/symbol-alias to xfail with clang In-Reply-To: <20220607125346.14861-1-blarsen@redhat.com> References: <20220607125346.14861-1-blarsen@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 12:01:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87a6akg4u4.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Andrew Burgess Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Bruno Larsen via Gdb-patches writes: > Hi Jini, > > Great to hear that Kavitha's changes have landed on clang! I do think > that it is still important to have xfails, however, since only new > clangs would add the information, and GDB is tested in all manner of > systems. > > I have changed the patch to assume that clang 15 has Kavitha's patches, > and changed the clang compiler test. Does this look acceptable? > > [PATCH v4 03/14] gdb/testsuite: Change gdb.base/symbol-alias to xfail with old clang > > Clang didn't use to add alias information, even when using -gfull. This > commit checks if the clang version being used is already providing alias > information (15 or newer), otherwise it adds an XFAIL. My understanding from Jini's email was that for this test to pass we would also need this gdb patch: https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2022-April/188354.html So, if I had clang 15 right now, this test would still fail, right? I guess you either need to hold this patch back until the above is merged, or put this in with a generic "all clang" pattern (like you originally had) and then assume someone will spot the KPASS and fix up the test later. Also... > --- > gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp | 9 +++++++-- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp > index 289f49bbc3f..078158dc101 100644 > --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp > +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/symbol-alias.exp > @@ -31,6 +31,11 @@ foreach f {"func" "func_alias"} { > } > > # Variables. > -foreach v {"g_var_s" "g_var_s_alias"} { > - gdb_test "p $v" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}" > +gdb_test "p g_var_s" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}" > + > +# Clang didn't include alias information until version 15. > +if {[test_compiler_info {clang-[1-9]*}] > + || [test_compiler_info {clang-1[0-4]*}]} { Wouldn't clang-15 match the first of these patterns? Thannks, Andrew > + setup_xfail "clang/52664" *-*-* > } > +gdb_test "p g_var_s_alias" "= {field1 = 1, field2 = 2}" > -- > 2.31.1