Re: [PATCH] gdb/testsuite: add test for memory requirements of gcore

Guinevere Larsen
2025-02-24T20:19:35Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1136 bytes --]

On 2/24/25 5:00 PM, Guinevere Larsen wrote:
>> If there was no argument passing here then I'd say you should be using
>> spawn_wait_for_attach.  But that doesn't support argument passing...
>>
>> ... however, if you read that proc (and its helper proc) you'll see some
>> comments that suggest using eval/exec like you do are not the right
>> choice.
>>
>> So maybe we should either extend (somehow) spawn_wait_for_attach to
>> allow argument passing, or write something like spawn_wait_for_attach
>> that handles arguments?
>
> If I found the correct documentation page, I think it shouldn't be
> hard to extend spawn_wait_for_attach to handle arguments. And using
> optional arguments, it should be a  very minor patch, so I'll see what
> I can cook up.
>
> Thanks for the pointer, this definitely sounds like a better solution.

Actually, scratch that, we don't *need* to extend spawn_wait_for_attach.
We can just give it a list with one element: "$::binfile $megs". So I'll
definitely go this route.

I can add a convenience function to handle this anyway, if you'd prefer,
though

--
Cheers,
Guinevere Larsen
She/Her/Hers

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1874 bytes --]