From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21878 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2009 17:12:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 21867 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2009 17:12:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_93 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from eu1sys200aog115.obsmtp.com (HELO eu1sys200aog115.obsmtp.com) (207.126.144.139) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:11:14 +0000 Received: from source ([164.129.1.35]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob115.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKSXC/rUfwjAMzTcKfheAmb0myPqqpfD1z@postini.com; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:11:12 UTC Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (ns2.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id A553BDAE5 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:10:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail2.gnb.st.com (mail2.gnb.st.com [164.129.119.59]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id DAB7B4C58A for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:11:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [164.129.122.46] (gnx2504.gnb.st.com [164.129.122.46]) by mail2.gnb.st.com (MOS 3.8.7a) with ESMTP id CZK12744 (AUTH lyon); Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:11:36 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4970BFAC.2070301@st.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:12:00 -0000 From: Christophe LYON User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christophe LYON , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: gdb.cp/templates.exp, ctor/dtor breakpoints, etc.... References: <49705F42.5080609@st.com> <20090116150357.GA14717@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20090116150357.GA14717@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg00097.txt.bz2 On 16.01.2009 16:03, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:19:46AM +0100, Christophe LYON wrote: >> Hello, >> >> While trying to improve my Open64/Gcc-3-3-3 based compiler results on the >> gdb-6.8 testsuite, I noticed on gdb.cp/templates.exp that even on >> x86/GCC-4.1.x there are still several KFAIL tests dating back to 2003. >> >> In particular, there are issues when setting breakpoints on ctor/dtor. >> >> I thought that the recent support for multiple breakpoints would fix >> this, so I am a bit surprised. > > They've all got PRs associated with them that explain the problems. > Most of them seem to deal with menus or with the names of the > constructors/destructors; we've mostly fixed breakpoints by line > number. > >> Could someone give me some updated status in this area: should the tests >> be revisited, or is it GDB itself that should be fixed, or GCC? > > In general we use kfail only for GDB bugs, not GCC bugs. > If I take the example of PR 1112 (now bugzilla #8217), which is an issue with destructor breakpoints, the corresponding test in templates.exp used to pass with my compiler, until I stopped emitting the DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name attribute. Doing this, I follow GCC behaviour, but I get a regression. If we don't consider this a GCC bug, it means that the way GDB recognizes ctor/dtor (any probably any overloaded function) is to be revisited? Am I right? Note that I am not asking for someone to do the job, I may have a look at it myself; I just want to make sure it is the right approach. Christophe.