From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Set process affinity in test to work around ARM ptrace bug
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 14:28:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <eec0d5c5-2100-6579-1dbc-2ad8fe5d11f9@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH=s-PMBzfgkio6mDtB5MkTFpGTmEU_7A0qCGe_CzyfMSDYKBw@mail.gmail.com>
On 07/25/2016 02:22 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> Ping.
Thanks.
Hmm. Seeing that the kernel fix was backported to so many
stable releases (positively) surprised me. In that case, I question
the testsuite workaround a bit harder. If this was a workaround in
gdb or gdbserver themselves, then it be more clear to me that the workaround
would be going to a broad set of users for whom updating the kernel is not easy.
But since this is only for when running the testsuite alone, I could argue that
this masks the problem and thus makes it look like gdb works better on an
affected system than it really does. I think if I were working on gdb/gdbserver
on arm, I'd much prefer if gdb told me my system had a broken ptrace, so I
could act on it, rather than masking it off and pretend all is well.
How about we make gdb / gdbserver detect bad kernel version, and output a
warning to the effect? We already have precedent in nat/linux-ptrace.c.
I think we should probably do that regardless of any testsuite workaround.
How bad would it be to push for people to update their kernels?
From a testsuite workaround angle, instead of sprinkling
set_process_affinity calls around, what if we we added a new proc
that would be called at the top of the .exp files:
gdb_caching_proc skip_arm_vfp_tests {} {
if arm && linux && broken linux versions {
return 1
}
return 0
}
This would skip tests instead of making them pass, but how bad would
that be? I assume that people doing gdb development/testing on arm will
be able to update their kernels, and will very much want to do that.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-25 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-30 13:57 Yao Qi
2016-06-30 14:20 ` Antoine Tremblay
2016-06-30 15:32 ` Pedro Alves
2016-07-04 10:50 ` Yao Qi
2016-07-25 13:22 ` Yao Qi
2016-07-25 14:28 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2016-09-01 14:48 ` Yao Qi
2016-09-02 1:00 ` Pedro Alves
2016-09-02 8:24 ` Yao Qi
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=eec0d5c5-2100-6579-1dbc-2ad8fe5d11f9@redhat.com \
--to=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=qiyaoltc@gmail.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