From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id wNG1K2HQLWM32D4AWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 11:27:29 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id B08331E112; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 11:27:29 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=RURns9Tn; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54C261E0D5 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 11:27:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 528F33857B8D for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 15:27:28 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 528F33857B8D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1663946848; bh=MtUvJxR5G+zuzSik/ULgwjQ80Vu1YFGfDD30kW3pocA=; h=References:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=RURns9TniY9+gDp9uWKCll9JUW9MidhN9RkANKbY1ki5wxR7riokDeKtjHEFSuzHG gQP864W2tmWVlhwlxmRqLac0/t8XVy3+ZzHgIOSxgclKhbRiW34yq87UkkqkNubnr6 bUdVKWjKLlY+36iI5qll6aSS4qLBRnRsdm125epw= Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 211CA3857B8D for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 15:27:01 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 211CA3857B8D Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id s10so463671ljp.5 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 08:27:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=MtUvJxR5G+zuzSik/ULgwjQ80Vu1YFGfDD30kW3pocA=; b=fkwQeqjUBzCiaf86UVglY0YI6fGjHUCHybIwnFpkKhL/nXe2alXEBdYOiWTDMo3xnD 8u+O7l9kdl2WSmMo0vmvtFoG9eJs9PaTe3n4nVChzY2NgRH5G0dsPNQWc+goLn9tGtQx PR36uDM5lyfL/Hb7gevtoPkPbBPLk9Ly/otjbNeNLRVryVbxuZcPX0ix7WKyNLZLqTHr xOhvfm9E+P4JMhAU+7DtvEQOqasPx8pG8dNdh/yY45Em+mkR7WsFftLV2rxOAV74L1gP U2+FEQMpH5oa28mH9n9t7cqzVcZEHFa0fH0Pk5vR+7IoH3Yik5N0/TkdS/2EetssqCbZ 50qA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3vw/i3HnSeBNZzsHLOPov23TUl/jYAlhslX/QuFH3rDFZnrPnj PQ/znfm06lWLqwlvSRPTslqwXBqekXuyND3rEYPxmbj9X7yUVw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4srE0NUMZD/tCpP+KAaZgqqwNv3wKHgq2cx1sBIm1Owwhy7mwrqqSIxKUpawXBjr6s/nf3EFTDYXalkUNJBBI= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a7cf:0:b0:26c:541a:e04c with SMTP id x15-20020a2ea7cf000000b0026c541ae04cmr2976730ljp.425.1663946819328; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 08:26:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <86aeaf80-204b-78dc-89b4-f1745bb75754@simark.ca> In-Reply-To: <86aeaf80-204b-78dc-89b4-f1745bb75754@simark.ca> Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 18:26:48 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Running testsuite on QEMU (sorry if possible duplicate) To: Simon Marchi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Konstantin Vladimirov via Gdb Reply-To: Konstantin Vladimirov Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" Hi, > Are you using a remote target test setup, where the testsuite starts a gdbserver in the VM and GDB runs on the (e.g. x86-64) host? Exactly this case. > This would be a mistake, it would need to be fixed Thanks, then we will fix such cases locally and send some patches to the upstream. --- With best regards, Konstantin On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 5:51 PM Simon Marchi wrote: > > > > On 2022-09-22 06:31, Konstantin Vladimirov via Gdb wrote: > > Hi, > > > > My colleague Ivan already sent this question to this mailing list, but > > it looks like his email hasn't landed. > > > > We are trying to run dejagnu/gdb testsuite on QEMU (RISCV) on Linux. > > Some tests that pass on the local machine fail as they expect having > > shared libs or other binary files at hardcoded paths on a machine > > (QEMU in our case) where the binary is running. > > > > Question is: is it ok to patch gdb testsuite to get rid of hardcoded > > paths. Or maybe this is something intentional? > > > > Example: gdb.base/print-file-var.exp, see SHLIB_NAME variable. > > Can you clarify what is your setup? > > Are you using a remote host test setup? This would mean that you > cross-compile and "make check" on your host (e.g. your x86-64 machine), > but the testsuite uploads the gdb binary in the VM and runs it there. > And GDB itself would debug the local system natively (in the VM). > > Or, are you using a remote target test setup, where the testsuite starts > a gdbserver in the VM and GDB runs on the (e.g. x86-64) host? > > Either way, it sounds like that test you mention would be broken either > way, as SHLIB_NAME would be a path on the host. This would be a > mistake, it would need to be fixed. Not many people are using remote > host/target test setups, so these mistakes tend to creep in a lot. > > Simon