Re: [PATCH] [gdb/tdep] Fix unrelocated pc in i386_displaced_step_fixup

Tom de Vries
2026-03-20T16:34:10Z

On 3/19/26 1:34 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> I still see these failures:
>
> FAIL: gdb.threads/next-fork-other-thread.exp: fork_func=fork: target-non-stop=off: non-stop=off: displaced-stepping=auto: i=4: next to other line
> FAIL: gdb.threads/next-fork-other-thread.exp: fork_func=fork: target-non-stop=off: non-stop=off: displaced-stepping=on: i=2: next to other line
> FAIL: gdb.threads/next-fork-other-thread.exp: fork_func=fork: target-non-stop=off: non-stop=off: displaced-stepping=off: i=4: next to for loop
>
> The first two are described by PR gdb/29040, but the third is a
> different error message, but I don't know if the third failure is a
> consequence of the first two failures or not.

The failures are independent, gdb gets a clean_restart for each
different displaced-stepping value (on/off/auto).

But AFAUI, the FAILs are essentially the same: the main thread is
stepping through a loop when a non-main thread runs into an abort.

The test name varies with were we happen to be in the loop at that moment.

Thanks,
- Tom

> Still I do think the fix
> you are proposing here is correct, so with the commit message cleaned