This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: gdb.base/annota1.exp tweak for hpux11
- From: Jim Blandy <jimb at zwingli dot cygnus dot com>
- To: law at redhat dot com
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 20 Dec 2001 04:09:19 -0500
- Subject: Re: gdb.base/annota1.exp tweak for hpux11
- References: <23508.1008805900@porcupine.cygnus.com>
Sure, that seems like an appropriate xfail. Please commit this
change, if you haven't already.
law@redhat.com writes:
>
>
> When using ttrace on hpux11, SIGTRAP events are not normally passed along
> to the inferior process.
>
> There is a bit which can be set which is supposed to allow SIGTRAP events
> to be delivered to the child; however, setting that bit has had no observable
> impact (and yes, I verified that the bit was set by reading back the
> structure via a second ttrace call :-)
>
> This is of interest because annota1.exp sends a SIGTRAP to the child and
> expects it to be delivered. If the signal isn't delivered we get a
> testsuite failure.
>
> Given that I haven't been able to find a way to actually get the proper
> behavior from hpux11 (which included searching their support site for
> relevant kernel & library updates), my recommendation is to xfail the test.
>
> * gdb.base/annota1.exp: Expect failure for hpux11 when posting
> a SIGTRAP to the inferior.
>
> Index: annota1.exp
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/cvsfiles/devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/annota1.exp,v
> retrieving revision 1.13
> diff -c -3 -p -r1.13 annota1.exp
> *** annota1.exp 2001/06/14 21:03:31 1.13
> --- annota1.exp 2001/12/19 23:46:46
> *************** gdb_expect {
> *** 424,429 ****
> --- 424,438 ----
> # FIXME: annotate-signal not tested (requires that the inferior be
> # stopped by a "random" signal)
> #
> + # SIGTRAP signals are dropped before they get to the inferior process
> + # on hpux11. In theory, this behaivor can be controlled by setting
> + # TTEO_NORM_SIGTRAP in the inferior, but doing so did not cause
> + # the signal to be properly delivered.
> + #
> + # It has been verified that other signals will be delivered. However,
> + # rather than twiddle the test, I choose to leave it as-is as it
> + # exposes an interesting failure on hpux11.
> + setup_xfail hppa*-*-hpux11*
> send_gdb "signal SIGTRAP\n"
> gdb_expect {
> -re ".*\032\032post-prompt\r\nContinuing with signal
> SIGTRAP.\r\n\r\n\032\032starting\r\n\r\n\032\032frames-invalid\r\n\r\n\032\032f
> rames-invalid\r\n\r\n\032\032signalled\r\n\r\nProgram terminated with signal
> \r\n\032\032signal-name\r\nSIGTRAP\r\n\032\032signal-name-end\r\n,
> \r\n\032\032signal-string\r\nTrace.breakpoint trap\r\n\032\032signal-string-end
> \r\n.\r\nThe program no longer exists.\r\n\r\n\032\032stopped\r\n$gdb_prompt$"
> \
>
>
>
>
>