* [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints
@ 2012-07-21 3:04 Marc Khouzam
2012-07-23 19:08 ` Tom Tromey
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-21 3:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Hi,
I got a bug report that conditions were ignored for pending breakpoints.
It turns out to only happen for MI and I added a example session at the end
of this mail.
The below patch fixes this by storing the condition string for pending bp.
The extra_string should receive the same treatment, but I'll send that in
a separate patch.
No regressions on Ubuntu 32bit (actually, I got better results, but I think
it has to do with intermittent failures).
Is this ok for HEAD and 7_5?
Thanks
Marc
2012-07-20 Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com>
* breakpoint.c (create_breakpoint): Store condition for pending
breakpoints.
### Eclipse Workspace Patch 1.0
#P src
Index: gdb/breakpoint.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/breakpoint.c,v
retrieving revision 1.694
diff -u -r1.694 breakpoint.c
--- gdb/breakpoint.c 19 Jul 2012 15:38:16 -0000 1.694
+++ gdb/breakpoint.c 21 Jul 2012 02:30:14 -0000
@@ -9557,7 +9557,18 @@
init_raw_breakpoint_without_location (b, gdbarch, type_wanted, ops);
b->addr_string = copy_arg;
- b->cond_string = NULL;
+ if (parse_condition_and_thread)
+ b->cond_string = NULL;
+ else
+ {
+ /* Create a private copy of condition string. */
+ if (cond_string)
+ {
+ cond_string = xstrdup (cond_string);
+ make_cleanup (xfree, cond_string);
+ }
+ b->cond_string = cond_string;
+ }
b->extra_string = NULL;
b->ignore_count = ignore_count;
b->disposition = tempflag ? disp_del : disp_donttouch;
Broken session:
--------------
> gdb myapp.exe
GNU gdb (GDB) 7.5.50.20120720-cvs
(gdb) interpreter-exec mi "-break-insert -f -c 1==2 /home/lmckhou/runtime-TestDSF/myLinuxDll/src/mydll.c:3"
&"No source file named /home/lmckhou/runtime-TestDSF/myLinuxDll/src/mydll.c.\n"
^done,bkpt={number="1",type="breakpoint",disp="keep",enabled="y",addr="<PENDING>",pending="/home/lmckhou/runtime-TestDSF/myLinuxDll/src/mydll.c:3",times="0",original-location="/home/lmckhou/runtime-TestDSF/myLinuxDll/src/mydll.c:3"}
(gdb) info b
Num Type Disp Enb Address What
1 breakpoint keep y <PENDING> /home/lmckhou/runtime-TestDSF/myLinuxDll/src/mydll.c:3
=> Note that there is no condition shown with the breakpoint above
(gdb) r
Starting program: /home/lmckhou/runtime-TestDSF/myapp/Debug/myapp.exe
warning: Cannot call inferior functions, you have broken Linux kernel i386 NX (non-executable pages) support!
Breakpoint 1, foo () at ../src/mydll.c:3
3 int j = 0;
=> Breakpoint hits although condition was 1==2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-21 3:04 [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-23 19:08 ` Tom Tromey 2012-07-24 17:42 ` Marc Khouzam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2012-07-23 19:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Khouzam; +Cc: gdb-patches >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> writes: Marc> 2012-07-20 Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> Marc> * breakpoint.c (create_breakpoint): Store condition for pending Marc> breakpoints. This is ok for trunk and the 7.5 branch. Thanks. Marc> Broken session: Marc> -------------- A patch to the test suite would be nice. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* RE: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-23 19:08 ` Tom Tromey @ 2012-07-24 17:42 ` Marc Khouzam 2012-07-25 13:11 ` Marc Khouzam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-24 17:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Tom Tromey'; +Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Tromey [mailto:tromey@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 3:08 PM > To: Marc Khouzam > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Subject: Re: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints > > >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> writes: > > Marc> 2012-07-20 Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> > Marc> * breakpoint.c (create_breakpoint): Store > condition for pending > Marc> breakpoints. > > This is ok for trunk and the 7.5 branch. > Thanks. Committed to both. Thanks! > > Marc> Broken session: > Marc> -------------- > > A patch to the test suite would be nice. I working on one now. Marc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* RE: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-24 17:42 ` Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-25 13:11 ` Marc Khouzam 2012-07-25 15:50 ` Tom Tromey 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-25 13:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Tom Tromey'; +Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' > -----Original Message----- > From: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org > [mailto:gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Marc Khouzam > Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:42 PM > To: 'Tom Tromey' > Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' > Subject: RE: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tom Tromey [mailto:tromey@redhat.com] > > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 3:08 PM > > To: Marc Khouzam > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > Subject: Re: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints > > > > >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> writes: > > > > Marc> 2012-07-20 Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> > > Marc> * breakpoint.c (create_breakpoint): Store > > condition for pending > > Marc> breakpoints. > > > > This is ok for trunk and the 7.5 branch. > > Thanks. > > Committed to both. > > Thanks! > > > > > Marc> Broken session: > > Marc> -------------- > > > > A patch to the test suite would be nice. Here is a test case for the problem. I'm not thrilled with it but it does fail before the fix and pass after, so it is probably sufficient. What I don't like about it is that it verifies that the condition prevents the breakpoint from hitting instead of making sure a breakpoint hits at the right condition. I had to do that because the alternative is to use a variable in the sharedlib for the condition, but then I would need to explicitly specify the sharedlib file name and line number when setting the breakpoint which didn't seem very future-proof. What do you think? ### Eclipse Workspace Patch 1.0 #P src Index: gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp,v retrieving revision 1.16 diff -u -r1.16 mi-pending.exp --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp 10 Jul 2012 15:32:51 -0000 1.16 +++ gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp 25 Jul 2012 13:03:42 -0000 @@ -53,7 +53,14 @@ ".*\\^done,bkpt=\{number=\"1\",type=\"breakpoint\",disp=\"keep\",enabled=\"y\",addr=\"<PENDING>\",pending=\"pendfunc1\",times=\"0\",original-location=\"pendfunc1\"\}"\ "MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc1" +# Set pending breakpoint with a condition via MI +# We use a condition that will prevent the bp from hitting +mi_gdb_test "-break-insert -f -c 1==4 pendfunc0" \ + ".*\\^done,bkpt=\{number=\"2\",type=\"breakpoint\",disp=\"keep\",enabled=\"y\",addr=\"<PENDING>\",pending=\"pendfunc0\",cond=\"1==4\",times=\"0\",original-location=\"pendfunc0\"\}"\ + "MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc0 if 1==4" + mi_run_cmd +# We should not stop on the breakpiont at pendfunc0 mi_expect_stop "breakpoint-hit" "pendfunc1" ".*" ".*" ".*" \ { "" "disp=\"keep\"" } \ "Run till MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc1" Index: gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c,v retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -r1.7 mi-pendshr.c --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c 4 Jan 2012 08:17:54 -0000 1.7 +++ gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c 25 Jul 2012 13:03:42 -0000 @@ -17,6 +17,12 @@ #include <stdio.h> +void pendfunc0 (int x) +{ + int y = x + 4; + printf ("in pendfunc0, x is %d\n", x); +} + void pendfunc1 (int x) { int y = x + 4; @@ -25,5 +31,6 @@ void pendfunc (int x) { + pendfunc0 (x); pendfunc1 (x); } ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-25 13:11 ` Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-25 15:50 ` Tom Tromey 2012-07-25 17:45 ` Marc Khouzam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2012-07-25 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Khouzam; +Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> writes: Marc> Here is a test case for the problem. I'm not thrilled Marc> with it but it does fail before the fix and pass Marc> after, so it is probably sufficient. Marc> What I don't like about it is that it verifies Marc> that the condition prevents the breakpoint from Marc> hitting instead of making sure a breakpoint hits at Marc> the right condition. I had to do that because the alternative Marc> is to use a variable in the sharedlib for the condition, Marc> but then I would need to explicitly specify the sharedlib Marc> file name and line number when setting the breakpoint which Marc> didn't seem very future-proof. Marc> What do you think? I think as long as it exercises the bug -- fails before the patch and passes after -- and is reasonably clean, then it is fine. Coding in the name of the library, etc, is also fine; there are some tools in the test suite to make this a bit less fragile, namely using variables in place of file names and using gdb_get_line_number. I don't have any problem with the approach in the patch though. Marc> +# Set pending breakpoint with a condition via MI Marc> +# We use a condition that will prevent the bp from hitting Periods after sentences. Marc> +# We should not stop on the breakpiont at pendfunc0 Typo, "breakpoint". Ok with those changes plus a ChangeLog entry. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* RE: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-25 15:50 ` Tom Tromey @ 2012-07-25 17:45 ` Marc Khouzam 2012-07-25 17:49 ` Tom Tromey 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-25 17:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Tom Tromey'; +Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' > I think as long as it exercises the bug -- fails before the patch and > passes after -- and is reasonably clean, then it is fine. > > Coding in the name of the library, etc, is also fine; there are some > tools in the test suite to make this a bit less fragile, namely using > variables in place of file names and using gdb_get_line_number. I updated to a better test based on what you said. The test now makes sure the breakpoint is skipped when it should and hits when it should. Ok? Thanks! 2012-07-25 Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> * gdb.mi/mi-pending.c: New method to set a second pending breakpoint. * gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp: Set a pending breakpoint with a condition. ### Eclipse Workspace Patch 1.0 #P src Index: gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp,v retrieving revision 1.16 diff -u -r1.16 mi-pending.exp --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp 10 Jul 2012 15:32:51 -0000 1.16 +++ gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp 25 Jul 2012 17:39:48 -0000 @@ -24,8 +24,9 @@ return 0 } -standard_testfile mi-pending.c mi-pendshr.c -set lib_sl [standard_output_file mi-pendshr.sl] +set libfile "mi-pendshr" +standard_testfile mi-pending.c $libfile.c +set lib_sl [standard_output_file $libfile.sl] set lib_opts debug set exec_opts [list debug shlib=$lib_sl] @@ -48,12 +49,29 @@ mi_gdb_load ${binfile} mi_load_shlibs $lib_sl -# Set pending breakpoint via MI +# Set pending breakpoint via MI. mi_gdb_test "-break-insert -f pendfunc1" \ ".*\\^done,bkpt=\{number=\"1\",type=\"breakpoint\",disp=\"keep\",enabled=\"y\",addr=\"<PENDING>\",pending=\"pendfunc1\",times=\"0\",original-location=\"pendfunc1\"\}"\ "MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc1" +# Set pending breakpoint with a condition via MI. +mi_gdb_test "-break-insert -f -c x==4 ${libfile}.c:pendfunc2" \ + ".*\\^done,bkpt=\{number=\"2\",type=\"breakpoint\",disp=\"keep\",enabled=\"y\",addr=\"<PENDING>\",pending=\"${libfile}.c:pendfunc2\",cond=\"x==4\",times=\"0\",original-location=\"${libfile}.c:pendfunc2\"\}"\ + "MI pending breakpoint on ${libfile}.c:pendfunc2 if x==4" + mi_run_cmd mi_expect_stop "breakpoint-hit" "pendfunc1" ".*" ".*" ".*" \ { "" "disp=\"keep\"" } \ "Run till MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc1" + +mi_send_resuming_command "exec-continue" "continuing execution to skip conditional bp" +# We should not stop on the conditional breakpoint yet, but we stop on the original bp. +mi_expect_stop "breakpoint-hit" "pendfunc1" ".*" ".*" ".*" \ + { "" "disp=\"keep\"" } \ + "Run till MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc1 a second time" + +mi_send_resuming_command "exec-continue" "continuing execution to conditional bp" +# Now we should stop on the conditional breakpoint. +mi_expect_stop "breakpoint-hit" "pendfunc2" ".*" ".*" ".*" \ + { "" "disp=\"keep\"" } \ + "Run till MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc2 with x==4" Index: gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c,v retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -r1.7 mi-pendshr.c --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c 4 Jan 2012 08:17:54 -0000 1.7 +++ gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c 25 Jul 2012 17:39:48 -0000 @@ -23,7 +23,13 @@ printf ("in pendfunc1, x is %d\n", x); } +void pendfunc2 (int x) +{ + printf ("in pendfunc2, x is %d\n", x); +} + void pendfunc (int x) { pendfunc1 (x); + pendfunc2 (x); } ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-25 17:45 ` Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-25 17:49 ` Tom Tromey 2012-07-25 18:26 ` Marc Khouzam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2012-07-25 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Khouzam; +Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> writes: Marc> -standard_testfile mi-pending.c mi-pendshr.c Marc> -set lib_sl [standard_output_file mi-pendshr.sl] Marc> +set libfile "mi-pendshr" Marc> +standard_testfile mi-pending.c $libfile.c Marc> +set lib_sl [standard_output_file $libfile.sl] I think it is better to leave the standard_testfile call as-is: standard_testfile mi-pending.c mi-pendshr.c set lib_sl [standard_output_file mi-pendshr.sl] and then Marc> +mi_gdb_test "-break-insert -f -c x==4 ${libfile}.c:pendfunc2" \ ... use ${srcfile2} here instead of ${libfile}.c Setting srcfile2 is part of the contract of standard_testfile. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* RE: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-25 17:49 ` Tom Tromey @ 2012-07-25 18:26 ` Marc Khouzam 2012-07-25 18:43 ` Tom Tromey 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-25 18:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Tom Tromey'; +Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Tromey [mailto:tromey@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 1:49 PM > To: Marc Khouzam > Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' > Subject: Re: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints > > >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> writes: > > Marc> -standard_testfile mi-pending.c mi-pendshr.c > Marc> -set lib_sl [standard_output_file mi-pendshr.sl] > Marc> +set libfile "mi-pendshr" > Marc> +standard_testfile mi-pending.c $libfile.c > Marc> +set lib_sl [standard_output_file $libfile.sl] > > I think it is better to leave the standard_testfile call as-is: > > standard_testfile mi-pending.c mi-pendshr.c > set lib_sl [standard_output_file mi-pendshr.sl] > > and then > > Marc> +mi_gdb_test "-break-insert -f -c x==4 ${libfile}.c:pendfunc2" \ > > ... use ${srcfile2} here instead of ${libfile}.c > > Setting srcfile2 is part of the contract of standard_testfile. Thanks for that. I've also added a check to make sure x==4 when the breakpoint hits. How about this? P.S. To save time, is there a good way to run a single test while writing it? I currently hack around to get it done, but I'm hoping there is a better way. 2012-07-25 Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> * gdb.mi/mi-pending.c: New method to set a second pending breakpoint. * gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp: Set a pending breakpoint with a condition. ### Eclipse Workspace Patch 1.0 #P src Index: gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp,v retrieving revision 1.16 diff -u -r1.16 mi-pending.exp --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp 10 Jul 2012 15:32:51 -0000 1.16 +++ gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pending.exp 25 Jul 2012 18:24:54 -0000 @@ -48,12 +48,29 @@ mi_gdb_load ${binfile} mi_load_shlibs $lib_sl -# Set pending breakpoint via MI +# Set pending breakpoint via MI. mi_gdb_test "-break-insert -f pendfunc1" \ ".*\\^done,bkpt=\{number=\"1\",type=\"breakpoint\",disp=\"keep\",enabled=\"y\",addr=\"<PENDING>\",pending=\"pendfunc1\",times=\"0\",original-location=\"pendfunc1\"\}"\ "MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc1" +# Set pending breakpoint with a condition via MI. +mi_gdb_test "-break-insert -f -c x==4 ${srcfile2}:pendfunc2" \ + ".*\\^done,bkpt=\{number=\"2\",type=\"breakpoint\",disp=\"keep\",enabled=\"y\",addr=\"<PENDING>\",pending=\"${srcfile2}:pendfunc2\",cond=\"x==4\",times=\"0\",original-location=\"${srcfile2}:pendfunc2\"\}"\ + "MI pending breakpoint on ${srcfile2}:pendfunc2 if x==4" + mi_run_cmd mi_expect_stop "breakpoint-hit" "pendfunc1" ".*" ".*" ".*" \ { "" "disp=\"keep\"" } \ "Run till MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc1" + +mi_send_resuming_command "exec-continue" "continuing execution to skip conditional bp" +# We should not stop on the conditional breakpoint yet, but we stop on the original bp. +mi_expect_stop "breakpoint-hit" "pendfunc1" ".*" ".*" ".*" \ + { "" "disp=\"keep\"" } \ + "Run till MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc1 a second time" + +mi_send_resuming_command "exec-continue" "continuing execution to conditional bp" +# Now we should stop on the conditional breakpoint. +mi_expect_stop "breakpoint-hit" "pendfunc2" "\{name=\"x\",value=\"4\"\}" ".*" ".*" \ + { "" "disp=\"keep\"" } \ + "Run till MI pending breakpoint on pendfunc2 with x==4" Index: gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c,v retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -r1.7 mi-pendshr.c --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c 4 Jan 2012 08:17:54 -0000 1.7 +++ gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-pendshr.c 25 Jul 2012 18:24:54 -0000 @@ -23,7 +23,13 @@ printf ("in pendfunc1, x is %d\n", x); } +void pendfunc2 (int x) +{ + printf ("in pendfunc2, x is %d\n", x); +} + void pendfunc (int x) { pendfunc1 (x); + pendfunc2 (x); } ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-25 18:26 ` Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-25 18:43 ` Tom Tromey 2012-07-25 18:38 ` Marc Khouzam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2012-07-25 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Khouzam; +Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> writes: Marc> Thanks for that. I've also added a check to make sure x==4 when Marc> the breakpoint hits. How about this? Ok. Marc> P.S. To save time, is there a good way to run a single test while Marc> writing it? What I do is cd build/gdb/testsuite runtest whatever.exp "make check RUNTESTFLAGS=whatever.exp" also works but is wordier. You can also run just a single directory with runtest --directory=gdb.python Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* RE: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints 2012-07-25 18:43 ` Tom Tromey @ 2012-07-25 18:38 ` Marc Khouzam 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Marc Khouzam @ 2012-07-25 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Tom Tromey'; +Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Tromey [mailto:tromey@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 2:30 PM > To: Marc Khouzam > Cc: 'gdb-patches@sourceware.org' > Subject: Re: [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints > > >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> writes: > > Marc> Thanks for that. I've also added a check to make sure x==4 when > Marc> the breakpoint hits. How about this? > > Ok. Committed to HEAD. > > Marc> P.S. To save time, is there a good way to run a single > test while > Marc> writing it? > > What I do is > > cd build/gdb/testsuite > runtest whatever.exp Awesome! That's what I needed. > "make check RUNTESTFLAGS=whatever.exp" also works but is wordier. > > You can also run just a single directory with > > runtest --directory=gdb.python I didn't know that, but I found this one (slightly faster to type): make check-gdb.python Thanks! Marc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-07-25 18:43 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2012-07-21 3:04 [patch] MI ignores conditions for pending breakpoints Marc Khouzam 2012-07-23 19:08 ` Tom Tromey 2012-07-24 17:42 ` Marc Khouzam 2012-07-25 13:11 ` Marc Khouzam 2012-07-25 15:50 ` Tom Tromey 2012-07-25 17:45 ` Marc Khouzam 2012-07-25 17:49 ` Tom Tromey 2012-07-25 18:26 ` Marc Khouzam 2012-07-25 18:43 ` Tom Tromey 2012-07-25 18:38 ` Marc Khouzam
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox