File fix-the-gdb.ada-inline-section-gc.exp-test.patch of Package gdb

Overview Repositories Revisions Requests Users Attributes Meta

File fix-the-gdb.ada-inline-section-gc.exp-test.patch of Package gdb (Revision e118954a7b5ee9a56c9e519ce0b644b1)

Currently displaying revision e118954a7b5ee9a56c9e519ce0b644b1 , Show latest

From c21fd9f7d5911fce0c17af7094d8861d1195dfda Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Carl Love <cel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 14:14:08 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 01/48] Fix the gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp test

The original intention of the test appears to be checking to make sure
setting a breakpoint in an inlined function didn't set multiple
breakpoints where one of them was at address 0.

The gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp test may pass or fail depending on the
version of gnat.  Per the discussion on IRC, the ada inlining appears to
have some target dependencies.  In this test there are two functions,
callee and caller. Function calee is inlined into caller.  The test sets
a breakpoint in function callee.  The reported location where the
breakpoint is set may be at the requested location in callee or the
location in caller after callee has been inlined.  The test needs to
accept either location as correct provided the breakpoint address is not
zero.

This patch checks to see if the reported breakpoint is in function callee
or function caller and fails if the breakpoint address is 0x0.  The line
number where the breakpoint is set will match the requested line if the
breakpoint location is reported is callee.adb.  If the breakpoint is
reported in caller.adb, the line number in caller is the breakpoint
location in callee where it is inlined into caller.

This patch fixes the single regression failure for the test on PowerPC.
It does not introduce any failures on X86-64.
---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp   | 21 ++++++++++++++++---
 .../gdb.ada/inline-section-gc/caller.adb      |  3 ++-
 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp
index b707335eb04..4f8b8c95395 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc.exp
@@ -34,8 +34,23 @@ if {[gdb_compile_ada "${srcfile}" "${binfile}" executable $options] != ""} {
 
 clean_restart ${testfile}
 
-set bp_location [gdb_get_line_number "BREAK" ${testdir}/callee.adb]
+
+# Depending on the version of gnat, the location of the set breakpoint may
+# be reported as being at the requested location in file callee.adb or in
+# file caller.adb where the callee function was inlined.  Either way, only
+# one breakpoint should be reported and its address should not be at 0x0.
+set bp_location1 [gdb_get_line_number "BREAK" ${testdir}/callee.adb]
+set bp_location2 [gdb_get_line_number "CALLEE_LOC" ${testdir}/caller.adb]
+set test "break callee.adb:$bp_location1"
+set message "Breakpoint set"
+
 # The bug here was that gdb would set a breakpoint with two locations,
 # one of them at 0x0.
-gdb_test "break callee.adb:$bp_location" \
-    "Breakpoint $decimal at $hex: file .*callee.adb, line $bp_location."
+gdb_test_multiple $test $message {
+    -re "Breakpoint $decimal at $hex: file .*callee.adb, line $bp_location1." {
+	pass $test
+    }
+    -re "Breakpoint $decimal at $hex: file .*caller.adb, line $bp_location2." {
+	pass $test
+    }
+}
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc/caller.adb b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc/caller.adb
index 66eb2d9a910..161f3e85542 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc/caller.adb
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/inline-section-gc/caller.adb
@@ -18,4 +18,5 @@ with Callee;
 procedure Caller is
 begin
    Callee;
-end Caller;
+end Caller;    -- CALLEE_LOC, this is where the inlined callee breakpoint
+               -- is located.

base-commit: 582fc35843fdf71b82d645d83d2903e2546cc21a
-- 
2.35.3

Places

File fix-the-gdb.ada-inline-section-gc.exp-test.patch of Package gdb (Revision e118954a7b5ee9a56c9e519ce0b644b1)

Places