From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8005 invoked by alias); 22 Jun 2011 15:45:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 7994 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Jun 2011 15:45:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,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; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:44:55 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p5MFinwt026904 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:44:49 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5MFim5s012865; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:44:49 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5MFiljM007767; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:44:47 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Yao Qi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] Fixes to gdb.base/dump.exp: get value from address instead of name References: <4E007587.2050304@codesourcery.com> <4E00794D.708@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:45:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4E00794D.708@codesourcery.com> (Yao Qi's message of "Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:58:21 +0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2011-06/txt/msg00312.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi writes: Yao> IMO, the intention of tests in this gdb session is to test that "gdb is Yao> able to load these dump files, and read the correct memory contents from Yao> them", so it doesn't matter too much that gdb get them via name or Yao> address. I think the semantics of this part of tests is not changed. I agree. Yao> +proc capture_value_with_type { expression } { I don't fully understand this proc. Some comments would help. Yao> + if [regexp { \(.*\).*[0-9]+} $expect_out(0,string) output_string] { Is [0-9]+ really correct? I would have thought the results would be in hex. This would be a good spot for a comment describing the expected output. Yao> + pass "$test $output_string" Yao> + } else { Yao> + fail "$test unable to match regexp" Yao> + } Passes and fails should use the same text. Tom