Re: [PATCH] Prevent turning record on while threads are running (PR 20869)

[Simon Marchi <simon dot marchi at ericsson dot com>]

On 16-11-29 10:58 AM, Luis Machado wrote:
>> +if ![supports_reverse] {
> 
> Add an explicit untested call here?

Right, adding:

untested "reverse debugging not supported"

>> +proc test_record_while_running { } {
>> +    gdb_test "continue &" "Continuing."
>> +    gdb_test "record" "Can't enable record while the program is running.  Use \"interrupt\" to stop it first."
> 
> I have mixed feelings with the above test names. I'd know what to look 
> for in case of failure, but more explicit test names wouldn't hurt for a 
> quick inspection of the logs.
> 
> "move thread"
> "switch record on when thread is moving"
> 
> Feel free to pick it up though. Not a hard requirement.

You are right, it helps when reading the test.  The command by itself doesn't
convey why we are using doing that command.  How about:

  proc_with_prefix test_record_while_running { } {
      gdb_test "continue &" "Continuing." "resume target"
      gdb_test \
          "record" \
          "Can't enable record while the program is running.  Use \"interrupt\" to stop it first." \
          "switch record on while target is running"
  }

PASS: gdb.reverse/record-while-running.exp: test_record_while_running: resume target
PASS: gdb.reverse/record-while-running.exp: test_record_while_running: switch record on while target is running

I added proc_with_prefix, I think it can help by giving some context to the messages.

Thanks for the feedback,

Simon