Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.multi/multi-term-settings.exp

[Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>]

On 9/28/21 8:14 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 2021-09-28 6:57 p.m., Tom de Vries wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> When running test-case gdb.multi/multi-term-settings.exp in conjunction with:
>> ...
>> $ stress -c $(($(cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep -c ^processor) + 1))
>> ...
>> I run into:
>> ...
>> (gdb) PASS: gdb.multi/multi-term-settings.exp: \
>>   inf1_how=attach: inf2_how=attach: info inferiors
>> pid=14783, count=59^M
>> pid=14783, count=60^M
>>   ...
>> pid=14783, count=118^M
>> pid=14783, count=119^M
>> pid=14778, count=90^M
>> pid=14778, count=91^M
>> pid=14778, count=92^M
>> pid=14778, count=93^M
>> pid=14778, count=94^M
>> pid=14778, count=95^M
>> PASS: gdb.multi/multi-term-settings.exp: inf1_how=attach: inf2_how=attach: continue
>> Quit^M
>> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.multi/multi-term-settings.exp: \
>>   inf1_how=attach: inf2_how=attach: stop with control-c (SIGINT)
>> ...
>>
>> It occurred to me that the "Continuing." we see otherwise is not shown and
>> that it's possible that the control-C that is send is caught by gdb when
>> printing this.
>>
>> Fix this by waiting for the "Continuing." message before sending control-C.
>>
>> Tested on x86_64-linux.
>>
>> Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24929
>>
>> Any comments?
>>
> 
> Hmm, think rang a bell.  I had posted a patch for this a few months back:
> 
>  https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-June/179503.html
> 
> The idea is the same, but my version is more complete, IMHO.
> 
> Sorry I didn't think of splitting that one out of the series at the time, this
> could have been fixed all this time.  :-/
> 

Np.  I applied the patch locally and it works for me.

Anything preventing this from going in now?

Thanks,
- Tom