From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12908 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2010 21:34:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 12899 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jul 2010 21:34:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 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, 28 Jul 2010 21:34:10 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6SLXjY3014881 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:33:45 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6SLXitY024873; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:33:44 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (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 o6SLXhYP023165; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:33:43 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 054D93792BB; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:33:42 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Thiago Jung Bauermann Cc: gdb-patches ml , Joel Brobecker Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix setting of VSX registers References: <1279738729.11022.23.camel@hactar> <1280165485.2661.85.camel@hactar> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:34:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1280165485.2661.85.camel@hactar> (Thiago Jung Bauermann's message of "Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:31:25 -0300") 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: 2010-07/txt/msg00525.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Thiago" == Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: Tom> I don't understand why the new gdb_test calls have an empty "message" Tom> argument. Thiago> So that they don't increase the test count. They are just sending Thiago> command to GDB to set the stage for the actual tests, they're of no Thiago> intrinsic interest to the testcase. Yeah, that makes sense. This is a sort of generic problem in dejagnu. Anyway, I am not sure this approach will work, because gdb_test calls gdb_test_multiple, which has a different default and which also may call 'fail'. One approach would be to refactor these procs so that your use can work. I think this would be nice to have -- I think it would be good to have fewer boilerplate tests with "synthetic" names, ones that nobody is interested in. Another approach would be to just give up and add a new test. That is sort of more traditional ;-) Tom