From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9292 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2009 00:18:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 9280 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jun 2009 00:18:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:18:19 +0000 Received: from wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.81]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n530IFcj031840 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 01:18:16 +0100 Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com (ywk9.prod.google.com [10.192.11.9]) by wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n530IEKu013678 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 17:18:14 -0700 Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 9so4351888ywk.42 for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:18:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.90.87.19 with SMTP id k19mr274322agb.39.1243988293822; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:18:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <000301c9e3d4$218eac20$64ac0460$@u-strasbg.fr> References: <20090430071853.99F5584890@localhost> <001201c9d860$e66c5850$b34508f0$@u-strasbg.fr> <000301c9e3d4$218eac20$64ac0460$@u-strasbg.fr> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:18:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFA] i386/amd64 h/w watchpoints in gdbserver From: Doug Evans To: Pierre Muller Cc: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00028.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Pierre Muller wro= te: >> > Do we have an automated testsuite result comparison script that can >> be >> > used for gdbserver testing? >> >> I just use --target_board=3Dnative-gdbserver.exp and compare >> before/after. >> ref: http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/Native_gdbserver_testing >> >> No regressions on amd64 gdbserver, 32-bit and 64-bit. > > =A0Did you try to remove the line saying that > gdbserver does not support hardware watchpoints, > does it change anything? The version I used has: # Can't do hardware watchpoints, in general. # But can for i386. if { [istarget i?86-*-*] || [istarget x86_64-*-* ] } { ;# leave unset, testcases check for whether it is defined } else { set_board_info gdb,no_hardware_watchpoints 1 } Plus while running the testsuite I had this applied: --- i386-low.c=3D 2009-06-02 17:11:37.000000000 -0700 +++ i386-low.c 2009-06-02 17:11:52.000000000 -0700 @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ #define ALL_DEBUG_REGISTERS(i) for (i =3D 0; i < DR_NADDR; i++) /* Whether or not to print the mirrored debug registers. */ -static int maint_show_dr =3D 0; +static int maint_show_dr =3D 1; /* Types of operations supported by i386_handle_nonaligned_watchpoint. */ typedef enum { WP_INSERT, WP_REMOVE, WP_COUNT } i386_wp_op_t; > >> > =A0I can test compilation on cygwin, >> > but testing can only be done manually... >> >> Thanks, can you give this a try? > > =A0I was able to compile without problems > and test gdb.base/watchpoint.exp > > and got 60 PASS (same as gdb itself). Thanks for running the tests. How about watchthreads.exp, watchthreads2.exp?