Re: [PATCH] Adjust `pc-fp.exp' for ppc64/s390x (PR 12659)

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

>> # Regression test for
>> # http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12659
>> gdb_test "info register pc fp" \
>> -    "pc: ${valueof_pc}\[\r\n\]+fp: ${valueof_fp}\[\r\n\]+"
>> + "pc(:)?.*${valueof_pc}(.*${hex} <.*>)?\[\r\n\]+fp:
>> ${valueof_fp}\[\r\n\]+"

Pedro> Relaxing the output like that means that inadvertent changes to x86's
Pedro> or ppc/s390x output might go unnoticed.  It's best to have

In this particular case, the check is really just to verify that the
named register, and nothing else, appears at the start of the line.

Before 12659 was fixed, "info register pc fp" printed:

sp fp: blah blah
fp: blah blah

The "fp" on the first line was the bogus bit.

I think the test would remain correct, with regards to what it was
intended to check, if it even went as far as "pc: .*\[\r\n\]+fp: .*";
checking the values is additional here.

Tom