From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-32427-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 8103 invoked by alias); 13 Jul 2008 17:06:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 8094 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jul 2008 17:06:47 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 17:06:17 +0000
Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) 	by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id m6DH4uk3022119; 	Sun, 13 Jul 2008 19:04:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost) 	by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id m6DH4ugw014744; 	Sun, 13 Jul 2008 19:04:56 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 17:06:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200807131704.m6DH4ugw014744@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: vladimir@codesourcery.com
CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <g5dbl0$5t8$1@ger.gmane.org> (message from Vladimir Prus on Sun, 	13 Jul 2008 20:48:39 +0400)
Subject: Re: gdb.base/watchpoint-solib.exp
References: <200807131506.m6DF6pp2001941@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <g5dbl0$5t8$1@ger.gmane.org>
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-07/txt/msg00141.txt.bz2

> From: Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
> Date:  Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:48:39 +0400
> 
> Mark Kettenis wrote:
> 
> > Hi Vladimir,
> > 
> > The watchpoint-solib.exp test seems to assume hardware watchpoints:
> > 
> >   gdb_test "watch g" "Hardware watchpoint 3: g" "set watchpoint on g"
> > 
> > Is this intentional, or should this be changed to accept "normal"
> > software watchpoints too?
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> this test was added by
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gdb.patches/37556 and that
> commits changes the way the memory locations to watch are stored and
> handled for watchpoint. Since software watchpoints do not actually
> have any memory locations to watch, I suspect that the crash this
> test is supposed to guard against did not happen with software
> watchpoints.

Ah, if you want to explicity test hardware watchpoints, perhaps we
should test that the target supports them and skip the test otherwise.

> Are you on a target with no hardware breakpoints?

Yes I am.  OpenBSD doesn't support hardware watchpoints on any of its
platforms.  But even many Linux targets don't support hardware
watchpoints.