Re: Fix solib-disc.exp regression with x86 gdbserver

["H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 11 April 2010 17:04:28, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> I got following extra failures with native gdbserver on Linux/x86-64.
>
> Compared to what?

Compared to normal "make check".

>> Are they expected?
>>
>> FAIL: gdb.ada/tasks.exp: continue to breakpoint (the program exited)
>> FAIL: gdb.ada/tasks.exp: continue until end of program (the program is
>> no longer running)
>> FAIL: gdb.ada/tasks.exp: info tasks after hitting breakpoint
>> FAIL: gdb.ada/tasks.exp: info tasks before inserting breakpoint
>
> No clue.
>
>> FAIL: gdb.base/break-entry.exp: running to *0x4002e0 in runto
>
> I see this too (Linux/x86-64).
>
>> FAIL: gdb.base/randomize.exp: fixed addresses should match
>
> Expected, gdbserver doesn't support disabling randomization.
>
>> FAIL: gdb.base/recurse.exp: second instance watchpoint deleted when
>> leaving scope
>
> I don't see this one.
>
>> FAIL: gdb.base/watch-vfork.exp: Watchpoint triggers after vfork (sw)
>> (the program exited)
>
> Expected.
>
>> FAIL: gdb.cp/exception.exp: continue to second throw
>
> I see this too.
>
>> FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-var-cmd.exp: in-and-out-of-scope: in scope now
>
> I see this too.
>
>> FAIL: gdb.threads/attach-stopped.exp: threaded: attach2, exit leaves
>> process sleeping
>
> I don't see this one.  May be a red herring -- gdbserver doesn't
> support what's being tested, IIRC.
>
>> FAIL: gdb.threads/execl.exp: continue across exec
>> FAIL: gdb.threads/fork-child-threads.exp: get to the spawned thread
>> (the program exited)
>> FAIL: gdb.threads/fork-child-threads.exp: next over fork
>> FAIL: gdb.threads/fork-child-threads.exp: two threads found
>
> Expected, gdbserver doesn't support following exec or fork events.
>
>> FAIL: gdb.trace/backtrace.exp: 1.13: trace in recursion: depth not equal to 3
> <skip a bunch of gdb.trace failures>
>> FAIL: gdb.trace/while-dyn.exp: 5.12: define ws <stepcount>
>
> Only recently (a couple of days) have the gdb.trace/ tests started
> running against gdbserver (it didn't support tracepoints before),
> but, none of these fails are expected on x86_64.  The all pass
> for me.  I'd like to understand them.  What are the failures like?
>

I am running Fedora 12. It may make a difference.

BTW, I noticed a few bugs when running gdbserver tests on
AVX. I will try to fix them.


-- 
H.J.