From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29418 invoked by alias); 21 Aug 2006 17:43:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 29409 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Aug 2006 17:43:57 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.palmsource.com (HELO mx2.palmsource.com) (12.7.175.14) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:43:50 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5742E24C66; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 10:43:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.palmsource.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx2.palmsource.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 00139-04-4; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 10:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ussunex01.palmsource.com (unknown [192.168.101.9]) by mx2.palmsource.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70BE424A6E; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 10:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 192.168.92.59 ([192.168.92.59]) by ussunex01.palmsource.com ([192.168.101.9]) via Exchange Front-End Server owa.palmsource.com ([10.0.20.17]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:43:47 +0000 Received: from svmsnyderlnx by owa.palmsource.com; 21 Aug 2006 10:43:46 -0700 Subject: Re: simulator runtime sanity checks From: Michael Snyder To: Mike Frysinger Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Jie Zhang In-Reply-To: <200608210411.33493.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <200608210411.33493.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:43:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1156182226.8438.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-08/txt/msg00165.txt.bz2 On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 04:11 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > is this expected behavior ? or should the higher sim layers catch this ? > > happens with latest cvs HEAD and arm-elf-gdb as well ... > > $ bfin-elf-gdb > (gdb) target sim > Connected to the simulator. > (gdb) run > Starting program: > warning: No executable file specified. > warning: No program loaded. > Segmentation fault You told the simulator to run, with no loaded program, and with memory basically in an un-initialized state. I'd say the behavior was not surprising. Which higher sim layer would you expect to catch this?