From: Luis Machado via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
To: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb, testsuite, btrace: relax unneeded stepi expected output
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:05:23 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b2043b7a-6a26-1929-e0ea-aab88435c5dd@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR11MB1690EDFE0233E117FA9619FCDE709@DM5PR11MB1690.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Hi,
On 4/12/21 5:22 AM, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
> Hello Luis,
>
>>> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ gdb_target_cmd $gdbserver_protocol $gdbserver_gdbport
>>> # Create a record, check, reconnect
>>> with_test_prefix "first" {
>>> gdb_test_no_output "record btrace" "record btrace enable"
>>> - gdb_test "stepi 19" "($hex in .* from .*|$hex\t$decimal.*)"
>>> + gdb_test "stepi 19" ".*"
>>>
>>> gdb_test "info record" [multi_line \
>>> "Active record target: .*" \
>>>
>>
>> Investigating some racy tests under make check-read1, isn't there a
>> better matching pattern that we can use here to prevent future
>> non-determinism?
>
> The test now ignores all output since it doesn't really matter where we end up
> after stepping. This should be the most future-proof pattern. Were you looking
> for a less lax pattern?
Yeah, I was looking for a more meaningful kind of test other than
expecting anything.
In any case, I was worried about possible races in the test...
>
> I ran gdb.btrace with check-read1 on IA and didn't find any issues.
... and since you verified it with read1, I guess it should be fine.
Thanks,
Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-12 11:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-16 9:26 Markus Metzger via Gdb-patches
2021-04-01 16:44 ` Tom Tromey
2021-04-01 16:54 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2021-04-12 8:22 ` Metzger, Markus T via Gdb-patches
2021-04-12 11:05 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches [this message]
2021-04-12 11:09 ` Metzger, Markus T via Gdb-patches
2021-04-12 11:11 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b2043b7a-6a26-1929-e0ea-aab88435c5dd@linaro.org \
--to=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=luis.machado@linaro.org \
--cc=markus.t.metzger@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox