Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.opt/solib-intra-step.exp with -m32 and gcc-10

[Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>]

On 1/28/21 7:04 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
>>>> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ gdb_test_multiple "step" $test {
>>>>  	exp_continue
>>>>      }
>>>>      -re -wrap "get_pc_thunk.*" {
>>>> -	if  { $state != 1 } {
>>>> +	if  { $state != 0 && $state != 1 } {
>>>>  	    set state -1
>>>>  	} else {
>>>>  	    set state 2
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't really understand what happens here, what state value means what.
>>>
>>> A bit of commenting would help.
>>
>> I tried to add comments but didn't manage to come up with something
>> sensible.
>>
>> Instead, I simplified gdb_test_multiple to just track the order of
>> events, and then added a few asserts about order of events.
>>
>> I hope this clarifies what the test is trying to do.  WDYT?
> 
> Hmm, it's still not clear to me what the intention of the test is.  It's
> not clear what kind of good or bad behavior from GDB we are looking for.
> That intention needs to be recorded in a comment, otherwise, I can't
> tell if the code matches what we want (since I don't know what we want).
> I kind of understand now that we do a step, we want to get until the
> "first-hit" line (or "second-hit" in the second case), but it's possible
> that we land on intermediary states, which are acceptable.  But there
> also seems to be an ordering component?  Why is that important?  Why
> don't we simply "exp_continue" when seeing "retry" or "get_pc_thunk",
> why bother recording anything?

Ah, I see.

Well, it's an attempt to be precise about what we accept in the test.
Much in the same way that two subsequent gdb_test do that.

But yeah, I don't think it's really important, so I can drop that part.

Thanks,
- Tom