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 2/2] Documentation and testcase


On 03/22/2015 08:45 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:

> +# We do not do file-backed mappings in the test program, but it is
> +# important to test this anyway.  One way of performing the test is to
> +# load GDB with a corefile but without a binary, and then ask for the
> +# disassemble of a function (i.e., the binary's .text section).  GDB
> +# should fail in this case.  However, it must succeed if the binary is
> +# provided along with the corefile.  This is what we test here.

It seems like we now just miss the case of corefilter that _does_ request
that the file backed regions are dumped.  In that case, disassembly
should work without the binary.  Could you add that too, please?  We
can e.g., pass a boolean parameter to test_disasm to specify whether
to expect that disassembly works without a program file.

> +
> +proc test_disasm { core address } {
> +    global testfile
> +
> +    # Restarting GDB without loading the binary
> +    gdb_exit
> +    gdb_start
> +
> +    set core_loaded [gdb_core_cmd "$core" "load core"]
> +    if { $core_loaded == -1 } {
> +	fail "loading $core"
> +	return
> +    }
> +
> +    gdb_test "disassemble $address" "No function contains specified address." \
> +	"disassemble function with corefile and without a binary"
> +
> +    clean_restart $testfile
> +
> +    set core_loaded [gdb_core_cmd "$core" "load core"]
> +    if { $core_loaded == -1 } {
> +	fail "loading $core"
> +	return
> +    }
> +
> +    gdb_test "disassemble $address" "Dump of assembler code for function.*" \
> +	"disassemble function with corefile and with a binary"

Looks like there are duplicate test messages here, in the
cases clean_restart, gdb_core_cmd, etc. fail.  You can fix that
with e.g.:

       with_test_prefix "no binary" {
           # Restart GDB without loading the binary.
           gdb_exit
	   gdb_start

	   set core_loaded [gdb_core_cmd "$core" "load core"]
	   if { $core_loaded == -1 } {
	      fail "load $core"
	      return
	   }

	   gdb_test "disassemble $address" "No function contains specified address." \
		"disassemble function"
       }

       with_test_prefix "with binary" {
	   clean_restart $testfile

	   set core_loaded [gdb_core_cmd "$core" "load core"]
	   if { $core_loaded == -1 } {
	      fail "load $core"
	      return
	   }

	   gdb_test "disassemble $address" "No function contains specified address." \
		"disassemble function"
       }

> +# Getting the inferior's PID

"Get".  Period at end.

> +set infpid ""
> +gdb_test_multiple "info inferiors" "getting inferior pid" {
> +    -re "process \($decimal\).*\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
> +	set infpid $expect_out(1,string)
> +    }
> +}
> +
> +# Get the main function's address

Period.

(I saw a few other similar gerund uses in the file which
read a bit odd to me, but I didn't point them all out.)

This is OK with the missing test added.

Thanks for the patience and for working on this.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves


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