Re: gdb reverse execution: how to actually run tests for it?

[Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>]

Jakob Engblom wrote:
>> Pedro> For the generic reverse execution tests --- reverse step, reverse
>> Pedro> next, reverse continue, run to breakpoint in reverse, etc., etc.,
>> Pedro> I'd must prefer that we would get rid of the need for board files
>> Pedro> at all.  :-)
>>
>> Pedro>  1. for native targets, the only reverse solution we currently support
> is
>> Pedro>  precord.  I can't see why we can't default to testing the reverse
> tests
>> Pedro>  with precord then.
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>> If the tests aren't enabled by default on some common platforms and thus
>> run as a regular part of testing, you can be sure there will be
>> regressions here.
> 
> So the question here is: who will deal with removing the board file dependency?
> I don't think we and our consultants doing the work for us are competent
> enough...
> 
> So is it OK if we submit a kit of tests which are structured in the same way as
> the current reverse tests? Then we can deal with upgrading the tests later, once
> the board file requirements has been fixed?

I think that would be great.