Fix gdb.cp/typeid.exp failures for ppc64
Commit Message
On 12/05/2014 10:36 AM, Luis Machado wrote:
> On 12/01/2014 06:30 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>> On Monday, December 01 2014, Luis Machado wrote:
>>
>>> This test assumes the typeid symbols are always available before
>>> actually starting the inferior, which is not true for architectures
>>> that place such symbols under relocatable sections.
>>>
>>> The following patch fixes this by conditionalizing the execution of
>>> such tests on the accessibility of the typeid symbols before the
>>> inferior is running.
>>>
>>> Regression-tested on ppc32/64.
>>
>> Hey Luis!
>>
>> Thanks for the patch. Just a somewhat minor comment.
>>
>>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/typeid.exp
>>> b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/typeid.exp
>>> index 9963a8a..7469b2b 100644
>>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/typeid.exp
>>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/typeid.exp
>>> @@ -25,20 +25,35 @@ if {[prepare_for_testing $testfile.exp $testfile
>>> $srcfile {debug c++}]} {
>>>
>>> proc do_typeid_tests {started} {
>>> global hex
>>> + global gdb_prompt
>>> + set symbol_found 1
>>>
>>> - # We might see the standard type or gdb's internal type.
>>> - set type_re "(std::type_info|struct gdb_gnu_v3_type_info)"
>>> + # Try to access one of the symbols to make sure it is
>>> available. Some
>>> + # architectures put the symbols on relocatable sections, which
>>> means
>>> + # they will not be accessible before the inferior is running.
>>> + send_gdb "print 'typeinfo for int'\n"
>>> + gdb_expect {
>>> + -re "No symbol \"typeinfo for int\" in current
>>> context.*$gdb_prompt" {
>>> + set symbol_found 0
>>> + }
>>> + -re ".*$gdb_prompt" {
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>
>> Any particular reason for not using gdb_test_multiple here (and
>> everywhere else)? This "send_gdb...gdb_expect" dialect is not used
>> anymore in the testsuite, AFAIR.
>>
>
> It looks a bit more natural when you are aiming at tests that should not
> expose PASS/FAIL. But gdb_test_multiple can be used that way as well,
> though with a somewhat strange empty testname parameter.
>
> Works the same though.
>
> I've updated the patch and fixed a previous gotcha in the logic.
>
> Ok?
>
>
Of course, now actually attaching the patch itself!
Comments
Ping!
On 12/05/2014 10:37 AM, Luis Machado wrote:
> On 12/05/2014 10:36 AM, Luis Machado wrote:
>> On 12/01/2014 06:30 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>>> On Monday, December 01 2014, Luis Machado wrote:
>>>
>>>> This test assumes the typeid symbols are always available before
>>>> actually starting the inferior, which is not true for architectures
>>>> that place such symbols under relocatable sections.
>>>>
>>>> The following patch fixes this by conditionalizing the execution of
>>>> such tests on the accessibility of the typeid symbols before the
>>>> inferior is running.
>>>>
>>>> Regression-tested on ppc32/64.
>>>
>>> Hey Luis!
>>>
>>> Thanks for the patch. Just a somewhat minor comment.
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/typeid.exp
>>>> b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/typeid.exp
>>>> index 9963a8a..7469b2b 100644
>>>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/typeid.exp
>>>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/typeid.exp
>>>> @@ -25,20 +25,35 @@ if {[prepare_for_testing $testfile.exp $testfile
>>>> $srcfile {debug c++}]} {
>>>>
>>>> proc do_typeid_tests {started} {
>>>> global hex
>>>> + global gdb_prompt
>>>> + set symbol_found 1
>>>>
>>>> - # We might see the standard type or gdb's internal type.
>>>> - set type_re "(std::type_info|struct gdb_gnu_v3_type_info)"
>>>> + # Try to access one of the symbols to make sure it is
>>>> available. Some
>>>> + # architectures put the symbols on relocatable sections, which
>>>> means
>>>> + # they will not be accessible before the inferior is running.
>>>> + send_gdb "print 'typeinfo for int'\n"
>>>> + gdb_expect {
>>>> + -re "No symbol \"typeinfo for int\" in current
>>>> context.*$gdb_prompt" {
>>>> + set symbol_found 0
>>>> + }
>>>> + -re ".*$gdb_prompt" {
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> Any particular reason for not using gdb_test_multiple here (and
>>> everywhere else)? This "send_gdb...gdb_expect" dialect is not used
>>> anymore in the testsuite, AFAIR.
>>>
>>
>> It looks a bit more natural when you are aiming at tests that should not
>> expose PASS/FAIL. But gdb_test_multiple can be used that way as well,
>> though with a somewhat strange empty testname parameter.
>>
>> Works the same though.
>>
>> I've updated the patch and fixed a previous gotcha in the logic.
>>
>> Ok?
>>
>>
>
> Of course, now actually attaching the patch itself!
>
>
2014-12-05 Luis Machado <lgustavo@codesourcery.com>
gdb/testsuite
* gdb.cp/typeid.exp (do_typeid_tests): Do not test type id printing
unless the symbols are available.
@@ -25,20 +25,34 @@ if {[prepare_for_testing $testfile.exp $testfile $srcfile {debug c++}]} {
proc do_typeid_tests {started} {
global hex
+ global gdb_prompt
+ set symbol_found 1
+
+ # Try to access one of the symbols to make sure it is available. Some
+ # architectures put the symbols on relocatable sections, which means
+ # they will not be accessible before the inferior is running.
+ gdb_test_multiple "print 'typeinfo for int'" "" {
+ -re "No symbol \"typeinfo for int\" in current context.*$gdb_prompt $" {
+ set symbol_found 0
+ }
+ -re ".*$gdb_prompt $" {
+ }
+ }
# We might see the standard type or gdb's internal type.
set type_re "(std::type_info|struct gdb_gnu_v3_type_info)"
+ if {$symbol_found == 1} {
+ foreach simple_var {i cp ccp ca b} {
+ gdb_test "print &typeid($simple_var)" \
+ " = \\($type_re \\*\\) $hex.*"
- foreach simple_var {i cp ccp ca b} {
- gdb_test "print &typeid($simple_var)" \
- " = \\($type_re \\*\\) $hex.*"
-
- # Note that we test pointer equality rather than object
- # equality here. That is because std::type_info's operator==
- # is not present in the libstdc++ .so.
- gdb_test "print &typeid($simple_var) == &typeid(typeof($simple_var))" \
- " = true"
+ # Note that we test pointer equality rather than object
+ # equality here. That is because std::type_info's operator==
+ # is not present in the libstdc++ .so.
+ gdb_test "print &typeid($simple_var) == &typeid(typeof($simple_var))" \
+ " = true"
+ }
}
# typeid for these is Derived. Don't try these tests until the