From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8434 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2006 16:30:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 8279 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2006 16:30:03 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ausmtp04.au.ibm.com (HELO ausmtp04.au.ibm.com) (202.81.18.152) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:29:15 +0000 Received: from sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (d23rh904.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.202]) by ausmtp04.au.ibm.com (8.13.6/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k5CGWhdc230184 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 02:32:43 +1000 Received: from d23av04.au.ibm.com (d23av04.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.237]) by sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.8) with ESMTP id k5CGWWcJ217116 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 02:32:32 +1000 Received: from d23av04.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av04.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k5CGTBOd018964 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 02:29:11 +1000 Received: from sig-9-65-112-63.mts.ibm.com (sig-9-65-112-63.mts.ibm.com [9.65.112.63]) by d23av04.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k5CGT6tQ018691; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 02:29:09 +1000 Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:30:00 -0000 From: Wu Zhou To: Nathan Sidwell cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: adjust watchpoint testing In-Reply-To: <4489E0D8.2000702@codesourcery.com> Message-ID: References: <4489E0D8.2000702@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-06/txt/msg00155.txt.bz2 Nathan, I had similar concerns about these watchpoint tests with you. However, I'd like to propose a somewhat different solution. On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > the recurse.exp test presume there are at least two hardware watchpoints. In my opinion, recurse.exp doesn't presume that. If there is no hardware watchpoint support, it will use software simulated ones. If the target can support only one h/w watchpoint, the second will switch to software watchpoint. This target-dependent feature might incur confusion some where. One may have difficulty in knowing for sure what this case is trying to test: s/w watchpoint, or h/w watchpoint, or both? If there are errors reported, what type of watchpoint trigger that? To track into the root cause, which code to look at? To clarify the situation, I propose to let recurse.exp based on totally on software simulated watchpoint. This can be done easily, by using "set can-use-hardware-watchpoint 0". Then we can add another similar testcase, specifically designed for hardware watchpoint. This testcase will first detect if there are any hardware watchpoint in the underlying target. If there are any, then go on with the test, otherwise skip and quit. In this h/w watchpoint specific testcase, we can also add some tests for rwatch and awatch, which is not touched by any testcase in current gdb testsuite (that is my reading of the code, correct me if I am wrong). For simplicity, we can use only one watchpoint. This has another strength in that it don't make any assumption. This is my rough thought. I had some code, but not finished yet. So I am very appreciated if anyone can provide any comment or insight into my proposal. Thanks a lot in advance. Regards - Wu Zhou > This > patch adds a gdb,hardware_watchpoint target info variable and adjust the test to > only test where two watchpoints are used, if they exist on the target. > > I found it necessary to adjust the watchpoint.exp expected reply too. > > ok? > > nathan > -- > Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery > nathan@codesourcery.com :: http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk >