This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com 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: [RFA]: threaded watchpoint test




Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 07:24:31PM -0400, Jeff Johnston wrote:

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 02:56:19PM -0400, Jeff Johnston wrote:


+# Watch values that will be modified by distinct threads.
+gdb_test "watch args\[0\]" "Hardware watchpoint 2: args\\\[0\\\]"
+gdb_test "watch args\[1\]" "Hardware watchpoint 3: args\\\[1\\\]"


What about platforms without hardware watchpoints?  This test will
generate a lot of FAILs in that case.


I mentioned this both in my original posting and in the test case itself. There is a test for hardware watchpoints and if there are no hardware watchpoints, it returns 0.


# This test verifies that a watchpoint is detected in the proper thread
# so the test is only meaningful on a system with hardware watchpoints.
if [target_info exists gdb,no_hardware_watchpoints] {
   return 0;
}


OK.  Unfortunately I don't think this test is conclusive; unix.exp will
always claim to have hardware watchpoints, and on many systems it does
not (for instance powerpc-linux).  If that turns out to be true we can
introduce gdb_has_hardware_watchpoints or something along those lines.


Ok. I have just checked in the test.


-- Jeff J.


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