From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 48756 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2016 12:26:39 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 48727 invoked by uid 89); 13 Apr 2016 12:26:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=again! X-HELO: usplmg20.ericsson.net Received: from usplmg20.ericsson.net (HELO usplmg20.ericsson.net) (198.24.6.45) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 12:26:36 +0000 Received: from EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.93]) by usplmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id EF.72.09012.F643E075; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:58:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elxa4wqvvz1 (147.117.188.8) by smtps-am.internal.ericsson.com (147.117.188.93) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 08:26:33 -0400 References: <1460473982-20054-1-git-send-email-antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com> <570E18AD.4040108@foss.arm.com> User-agent: mu4e 0.9.17; emacs 24.4.1 From: Antoine Tremblay To: Pierre Langlois CC: Antoine Tremblay , Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix aarch64 ftrace JIT condition testcase In-Reply-To: <570E18AD.4040108@foss.arm.com> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 12:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg00272.txt.bz2 Pierre Langlois writes: > Hi Antoine, > > On 12/04/16 16:13, Antoine Tremblay wrote: >> This patch fixes the following failure: >> FAIL: gdb.trace/trace-condition.exp: ftrace: -(21 << 1) == -42: check 10 >> frames were collected. >> >> This was due to aarch64_emit_sub using the wrong order in its operands, so the >> operation would end up being 42 - 0 rather than 0 - 42. > > Ooops, thanks for the fix! I was a little confused how I could have > missed this, it turns out I had forgotten to had parentheses in > `-(21 << 1) == -42' at the time, so `emit_sub' was not tested here. hehe. > > I aimed at testing `emit_sub' with the following test case which is > clearly not good enough: > > gdb.trace/trace-condition.exp: ftrace: 21 - 21 == 0 > > Would you be OK with changing it to "42 - 21 == 21" or something? > Right indeed good idea, I'm sending a v2 with this. > Thanks again! np. Antoine >> This patch also fixes the order of aarch64_emit_add for clarity. >> >> Tested on aarch64-native-extended-gdbserver. >> >> Note: trace-condition.exp was broken a bit so I had to modify it to run >> the test. A fix is coming for that in another patch. >> >> gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog: >> >> * linux-aarch64-low.c (aarch64_emit_add): Switch x1 and x0. >> (aarch64_emit_sub): Likewise. >> --- >> gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c >> index 12fe2e6..d237bde 100644 >> --- a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c >> +++ b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c >> @@ -2258,7 +2258,7 @@ aarch64_emit_add (void) >> uint32_t *p = buf; >> >> p += emit_pop (p, x1); >> - p += emit_add (p, x0, x0, register_operand (x1)); >> + p += emit_add (p, x0, x1, register_operand (x0)); >> >> emit_ops_insns (buf, p - buf); >> } >> @@ -2272,7 +2272,7 @@ aarch64_emit_sub (void) >> uint32_t *p = buf; >> >> p += emit_pop (p, x1); >> - p += emit_sub (p, x0, x0, register_operand (x1)); >> + p += emit_sub (p, x0, x1, register_operand (x0)); >> >> emit_ops_insns (buf, p - buf); >> } >>