From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10588 invoked by alias); 4 Mar 2005 16:20:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 10545 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2005 16:20:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO e31.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.129) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 4 Mar 2005 16:20:09 -0000 Received: from westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.10]) by e31.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j24GK9ua155414 for ; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:20:09 -0500 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id j24GK91x123560 for ; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 09:20:09 -0700 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j24GK8bn015813 for ; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 09:20:09 -0700 Received: from austin.ibm.com (netmail2.austin.ibm.com [9.41.248.176]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j24GK8am015804; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 09:20:08 -0700 Received: from lazy.austin.ibm.com (lazy.austin.ibm.com [9.53.94.97]) by austin.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j24GK8RZ184962; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 10:20:08 -0600 Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:20:00 -0000 From: Manoj Iyer X-X-Sender: manjo@lazy To: Daniel Jacobowitz cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] gdb.base/float.exp and gdb.base/commands.exp patch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20050303002718.GA4915@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00048.txt.bz2 Daniel, did u get a chance to reivew this patch? Thanks ----- manjo +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Cogito ergo sum + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Manoj Iyer wrote: > > What compiler are you testing with? > > I am using GCC (gcc version 3.4.3 20041212 (Red Hat 3.4.3-9.EL4)) > > > > On what line is it reporting that > > it has left the block? I'd like to understand the difference before we > > change this. > > I believe the line number is 82 in my case, and the testcase had 57. > > Ok here is the piece of output... > > --------------- paste ------------- > Continuing.^M > Watchpoint 11: local_var^M > ^M > Old value = 0^M > New value = 1^M > factorial (value=1) at ./gdb.base/run.c:81^M > 81 return (value);^M > $38 = 1^M > ^M > Watchpoint 11 deleted because the program has left the block in^M > which its expression is valid.^M > 0x0000000010000604 in factorial (value=511) at ./gdb.base/run.c:82^M > 82 }^M > $39 = 511^M > 1^M > ^M > Program exited normally.^M > (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/commands.exp: continue with watch > ------------- end paste ------------------------- > > > What about PowerPC targets which don't have an FPU? Hmm, it looks like > > GDB more or less assumes the FP is present. Not sure about SPE though. > > > > Yes I did think about ppc nofpu system, I believe they are mostly used in > embedded devices, but I could be wrong. So what is the probability of > coming accross one that someone will run this test on? But there should be > a check in the testcase to invalidate the testcase if floating point is > not present.(skip the test for no-fpu) > > Also, fileio.exp does some permission checks, ie read/write to a file > which has no read/write permissions, but if you run as root the test will > fail. There should be some mechanism by which the testcases should check > if user id is root, if it is temporarily become another user like "nobody" > or something like that. Couple of tests failed because of this, but I dont > know how to handle this. > > -- > Manjo >