This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/testcase] fix gdb.base/relocate.c
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: Kei Sakamoto <sakamoto dot kei at renesas dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 22:58:30 -0400
- Subject: Re: [patch/testcase] fix gdb.base/relocate.c
- References: <014401c344fc$7b0972d0$5169910a@KEI>
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 11:56:07AM +0900, Kei Sakamoto wrote:
> The attached patch fixes gdb.base/relocate.c.
>
> "relocate.exp: get address of function_bar" fails with m32r-elf-gdb
> as the following:
>
> print &function_bar
> $6 = (int (*)(void)) 0xc <global_bar>
> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/relocate.exp: get address of function_bar (unknown output)
>
> Both function_bar and global_bar have the same address, 0xc.
> Though they belong to different sections, gdb considers they
> are the same and prints global_bar's data instead of
> function_bar's.
>
> The same error happens with i386 if line 4 and 5 of relocate.c
> are modified as the following:
>
> short global_foo = 3;
> short global_bar = 4;
>
> I guess this is not gdb's bug but a feature and the testcase
> should be modified. So I made a patch file.
>
> The attached patch inserts a definition of a dummy array so that
> global_bar and function_bar should not have the same address.
>
> Kei
>
> 2003-07-08 Kei Sakamoto <sakamoto.kei@renesas.com>
>
> * gdb.base/relocate.c : Add a dummy array to make global_bar
> and function_bar have different addresses.
Ugh, this is OK, since the test can only reliably specify an offset for
.text.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer