This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] btrace: avoid tp != NULL assertion
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 14:03:20 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrace: avoid tp != NULL assertion
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1423473902-2286-1-git-send-email-markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com> <54F4DF9D dot 3060400 at redhat dot com> <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B231E6EEF71 at IRSMSX104 dot ger dot corp dot intel dot com> <54F5A12F dot 9000702 at redhat dot com> <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B231E6EF176 at IRSMSX104 dot ger dot corp dot intel dot com> <54F5BA0B dot 2000106 at redhat dot com> <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B231E6EF452 at IRSMSX104 dot ger dot corp dot intel dot com>
On 03/03/2015 01:55 PM, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
>> owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Pedro Alves
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 2:42 PM
>> To: Metzger, Markus T
>> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrace: avoid tp != NULL assertion
>
>
>>> No, that wasn't the reason for replacing the assert. There are no such
>>> errors in the gdb.btrace suite (which is mostly single-threaded) with my
>>> patch and I have not seen any such errors otherwise, either.
>>
>> Then it sounds like we're either lacking basic tests, or the threaded tests
>> are somehow not running correctly when gdb is a 32-bit program. I think
>> that if you step any non-leader thread, you should see it happen.
>> Grepping the tests, I think gdb.btrace/multi-thread-step.exp should have
>> caught it. My machine doesn't do btrace, so I can't try it myself...
>>
>> BTW, did any existing test in the testsuite catch the assertion we're
>> fixing?
>
> Almost all of them when run on 32-bit systems; -m32 on 64-bit systems does
> not catch this.
Right, that's why I said "when gdb is a 32-bit program". Sounds like
no existing test tries a "step" when not replaying then. It'd be very
nice to have one. Can I convince you to add one? :-)
Thanks,
Pedro Alves