This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Restrict gdb.base/gcore-relro-pie.exp to native/linux targets


On 02/23/2017 09:43 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
There's been talks / patches about adding that for years.
Unfortunately it hasn't happened yet, but I think it'd
be quite reasonable to have.

I find it reasonable too, but it is not here yet.

Not really.  It's a sign that the test is missing a predicate, but
it's not "cores work", IMO.  The testcase has a few requirements.
At least:

#1 - PIEs make sense for this target.
#2 - gcore works

To me this is a clear sign a predicate for #1 is missing.
We already detect #2.  Other tests build PIEs too.

IOW, IMO, all this talk about core files is a distraction
from the real issue.

But then I wonder why does compilation, linking, loading all
succeed without something realizing the binary can't run on
this target.  It may well be that PIEs do make sense for this
target.  It's not uncommon to call things "bare-metal" when
they're really pretty sophisticated RTOSs.

This is just a stack pointer startup problem, so not a matter of supporting PIE's or not.

How would that help, if it'd crash and loop the board too?


The test would need to be tweaked. The assumption that these targets can handle a crash is not always valid as it is with OS-based targets.

I remember i addressed problems with these assumptions in the past. It is similar to assuming reading 0x0 would error out or that it is a bad address. We are much more aware of that problem these days.

Unfortunately not a lot of bare-metal/RTOS testing going on for gdb at the moment. I think even QEMU shields these tests from problems sometimes.

Anyway, i know what i have to do to get this FAIL fixed!

The discussion about how focused/robust a particular gdb test is/needs to be can be rather long. At this point i don't think there is a lot of benefit from that, but maybe a worthy discussion in the future about how to improve gdb's testsuite, or not!


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]