FreeChainXenon/binutils-gdb
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

gdb.base/skip.exp: Don't abuse gdb_test's question support

Browse source 
gdb.base/skip.exp abuses gdb_test's support for answering a GDB
question to do this:

    # With gcc 9.2.0 we jump once back to main before entering foo here.
    # If that happens try to step a second time.
    gdb_test "step" "foo \\(\\) at.*" "step 3" \
	"main \\(\\) at .*\r\n$gdb_prompt " "step"

After a patch later in this series, gdb_test will FAIL if GDB does NOT
issue the question, so this test would start failing on older GCCs.

Switch to using gdb_test_multiple instead.  There are three spots in
the file that have the same pattern, and they're actually in a
sequence of commands that is repeated those 3 times.  Factor all that
out to a procedure.

I don't have gcc 9.2 handy, but I do have gcc 6.5, and that one is
affected as well, so update the comment.

Change-Id: If0a7e3cdf5191b4eec95ce0c8845c3a4d801c39e
This commit is contained in:
Pedro Alves 2022-05-17 10:25:12 +01:00
parent 8d08cccb01
commit d7440bee9f
1 changed files with 31 additions and 24 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

55
gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/skip.exp
View file

@ -122,6 +122,32 @@ with_test_prefix "step after deleting 1" {
gdb_test "step" "main \\(\\) at.*" "step 3"
}
# Test that we step into foo(), then into bar(), but not into baz().
proc step_bar_foo_skip_baz {} {
gdb_test "step" "bar \\(\\) at.*" "step 1"
gdb_test "step" ".*" "step 2"; # Return from bar()
# With at least gcc 6.5.0 and 9.2.0, we jump once back to main
# before entering foo here. If that happens try to step a second
# time.
set stepped_again 0
gdb_test_multiple "step" "step 3" {
-re -wrap "foo \\(\\) at.*" {
pass $gdb_test_name
}
-re -wrap "main \\(\\) at .*" {
if {!$stepped_again} {
set stepped_again 1
send_gdb "step\n"
}
exp_continue
}
}
gdb_test "step" ".*" "step 4"; # Return from foo()
gdb_test "step" "main \\(\\) at.*" "step 5"
}
# Now disable the skiplist entry for skip1.c. We should now
# step into foo(), then into bar(), but not into baz().
@ -136,14 +162,7 @@ with_test_prefix "step after disabling 3" {
return
}
gdb_test "step" "bar \\(\\) at.*" "step 1"
gdb_test "step" ".*" "step 2"; # Return from bar()
# With gcc 9.2.0 we jump once back to main before entering foo here.
# If that happens try to step a second time.
gdb_test "step" "foo \\(\\) at.*" "step 3" \
"main \\(\\) at .*\r\n$gdb_prompt " "step"
gdb_test "step" ".*" "step 4"; # Return from foo()
gdb_test "step" "main \\(\\) at.*" "step 5"
step_bar_foo_skip_baz
}
# Enable skiplist entry 3 and make sure we step over it like before.
@ -254,14 +273,8 @@ with_test_prefix "step using -fu for baz" {
gdb_test_no_output "skip disable"
gdb_test_no_output "skip enable 7"
gdb_test "step" "bar \\(\\) at.*" "step 1"
gdb_test "step" ".*" "step 2"; # Return from bar()
# With gcc 9.2.0 we jump once back to main before entering foo here.
# If that happens try to step a second time.
gdb_test "step" "foo \\(\\) at.*" "step 3" \
"main \\(\\) at .*\r\n$gdb_prompt " "step"
gdb_test "step" ".*" "step 4"; # Return from foo()
gdb_test "step" "main \\(\\) at.*" "step 5"
step_bar_foo_skip_baz
}
with_test_prefix "step using -rfu for baz" {
@ -271,14 +284,8 @@ with_test_prefix "step using -rfu for baz" {
gdb_test_no_output "skip disable"
gdb_test_no_output "skip enable 8"
gdb_test "step" "bar \\(\\) at.*" "step 1"
gdb_test "step" ".*" "step 2"; # Return from bar()
# With gcc 9.2.0 we jump once back to main before entering foo here.
# If that happens try to step a second time.
gdb_test "step" "foo \\(\\) at.*" "step 3" \
"main \\(\\) at .*\r\n$gdb_prompt " "step"
gdb_test "step" ".*" "step 4"; # Return from foo()
gdb_test "step" "main \\(\\) at.*" "step 5"
step_bar_foo_skip_baz
}
# Test -fi + -fu.