This is the mail archive of the 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] Use GCC5/DWARF5 DW_AT_noreturn to mark functions that don't return normally.

Hi Stan,

On Tue, 2014-12-09 at 10:57 -0800, Stan Shebs wrote:
> On 12/9/14, 2:49 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 14:02 +0000, Pedro Alves wrote:
> >> I wonder if we could have a test?  Could e.g., make sure we don't
> >> crash when the user confirms a return in a noreturn function.
> > 
> > I am not sure how to write such a test. This is mainly interactive code,
> > which will only trigger from_tty. I also am not sure such a test really
> > tests this new feature. Trying to return from a noreturn function
> > triggers undefined behavior. GDB probably won't crash, but the inferior
> > might since the result is unpredictable (that is precisely why I added
> > this, you forcibly return from a function and end up somewhere
> > unexpected). Which makes testing the expected output of the user
> > ignoring the warning somewhat hard.
> Chiming in here, just write the test so that it passes whether or not
> the inferior crashes - as you note, its behavior is undefined anyway.
> If GDB crashes or hangs, on any platform, that's a bug that we have to
> fix in GDB.

I am afraid I still don't understand what we would be testing (whether
the user if there is a tty gets to say yes or no?) or how to write such
a test where we don't seem interested in the actual result. Is there an
example to follow?



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