[Patch] Microblaze: Port of Linux gdbserver

[Ajit Kumar Agarwal]

-----Original Message-----
From: Pedro Alves [mailto:palves@redhat.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 4:58 PM
To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal; Michael Eager; Joel Brobecker
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Vinod Kathail; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
Subject: Re: [Patch] Microblaze: Port of Linux gdbserver

On 12/18/2014 08:56 AM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> From: Pedro Alves [mailto:palves@redhat.com] On 10/17/2014 08:22 PM, 
> Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> 
>> Gdb.base gdb testsuite is run and here is the status of gdb testsuite run for gdb.base.
>>
>>                 === gdb Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes            7804
>> # of unexpected failures        2263
> 
>>> Over 2000 unexpected failures is not very reassuring though.
>>> Have you looked at the logs to get an idea of what might be broken?
> 
> We have looked at the log files for the failures. Here are the main categories of the failure.
> 
> 1. push_dummy_code is not implemented for Micro blaze port  due to this  there are 350+ failures.

>>Eh, no inferior function call support.  Are you planning on implementing this?

>>You can set gdb,cannot_call_functions in your board file to skip the affected tests meanwhile.

> 2.  Failures for signals is around 357.

>>What sort of failures?

> 3. Watch point  failures are around 817.

>>Set gdb,no_hardware_watchpoints in the board file.

Thanks. We have used the following gdb options as per your suggestions.

set_board_info gdb,no_hardware_watchpoints 1 set_board_info gdb,cannot_call_functions 1 set_board_info gdb,nosignals 1

The gdb summary for gdb.base is as follows:

                === gdb Summary ===

# of expected passes            6047
# of unexpected failures        539
# of expected failures          17
# of known failures             21
# of unresolved testcases       26
# of untested testcases         43
# of unsupported tests          133

I will send the modified patch incorporating your comments.

Thanks & Regards
Ajit


> 
> Main total categories of the failure = 376 + 357 + 817 =  1550.
> 
> These failures are not because of  gdbserver patch and they seem to exist prior to this patch. 

Thanks,
Pedro Alves