From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8200 invoked by alias); 2 Aug 2012 06:50:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 8187 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Aug 2012 06:50:11 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_VT,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 06:49:53 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q726nc9K022342 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 2 Aug 2012 02:49:38 -0400 Received: from psique (ovpn-113-52.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.52]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q726nZ6m008443; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 02:49:36 -0400 From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: brobecker@adacore.com (Joel Brobecker), gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Remaining 7.5 regressions (Re: [ARM, commit, RFA 7.5] Fix HW breakpoints on unaligned addresses) References: <201208011334.q71DYc2H018639@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> X-URL: http://www.redhat.com Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 06:50:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <201208011334.q71DYc2H018639@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> (Ulrich Weigand's message of "Wed, 1 Aug 2012 15:34:38 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2012-08/txt/msg00052.txt.bz2 On Wednesday, August 01 2012, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Joel Brobecker wrote: >> > In general, what's the timeline for 7.5? I've noticed a couple of >> > other test case regressions when testing the branch on ARM, s390, >> > and Cell ... >> >> The branch was created on July 17th, and the target date for release >> creation is 2 weeks after that, which would have been today. I thought >> there was still one open issue, but the release page says we're clean >> (except for your issue). > > In addition to the failures fixed by the above patches, I'm still seeing: > > - Failures in gdb.base/pc-fp.exp on various platforms, as described here: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-07/msg00823.html > (just an output formatting issue) This patch will probably go in tomorrow when I wake up, if Pedro approves it. It is also simple enough to be committed to 7.5. > - Failures in gdb.mi/mi-var-rtti.exp on various platforms, see: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-07/msg00458.html > (seems to be a bug in the test case) I see them also on s390x as you pointed out, but not on ppc64. > - Failures in gdb.threads/watchpoint-fork.exp on ARM and PowerPC. > This looks like a pre-existing bug that hardware watchpoints are not > handled correctly across forks, which is now exposed since a test > case for this scenario was added. I seem some failures on s390x as well: +FAIL: gdb.threads/watchpoint-fork.exp: child: singlethreaded: breakpoint after the second fork (timeout) +FAIL: gdb.threads/watchpoint-fork.exp: child: singlethreaded: watchpoint after the second fork +FAIL: gdb.threads/watchpoint-fork.exp: child: singlethreaded: finish > - Some new C++ regressions on ARM / s390x (could be compiler issues?) Could you tell which C++ regressions are those? I see this on PPC64/s390x: -PASS: gdb.cp/inherit.exp: print g_vB (FIXME v3 vtbl ptr) -PASS: gdb.cp/inherit.exp: print g_vC (FIXME v3 vtbl ptr) +FAIL: gdb.cp/inherit.exp: print g_vB +FAIL: gdb.cp/inherit.exp: print g_vC ... -PASS: gdb.cp/inherit.exp: print g_vE (FIXME v3 vtbl ptr) +FAIL: gdb.cp/inherit.exp: print g_vE -PASS: gdb.cp/virtbase.exp: print *this +FAIL: gdb.cp/virtbase.exp: print *this ... -PASS: gdb.cp/virtbase.exp: print *(D *) e +FAIL: gdb.cp/virtbase.exp: print *(D *) e I am investigating the last two (virtbase.exp), since I had a brief discussion with Jan about the inherit.exp one and he mentioned it is probably a compiler issue (though I could not confirm yet). > - Failures in various core file tests on PowerPC (needs investigation) I am not seeing this on ppc64 RHEL 6.3. > - Failures in gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp on s390 (needs investigation) Fully passing for me on s390x RHEL 6.3. > - Failures in gdb.dwarf2/dw2-icc-opaque.exp on SPU and s390 (likewise) I can confirm on s390x, and I am also seeing on ppc64. >> The easiest for me would probably to create it on Friday, assuming >> that we don't discover something new by then. > > I'll see what I can track down and fix until Friday. Sorry for starting > my test series a bit late this time ... Please keep me informed if it is possible, I am also tackling some regressions as you are. Thanks, -- Sergio