[PATCH 3/5] [gdb/testsuite] Fix some test-cases for check-read1 (-lbl)

[Tom de Vries]

On 10/28/24 15:08, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> writes:
> 
>> On 10/26/24 12:33, Andrew Burgess wrote:
>>> Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> writes:
>>>
>>>> I ran the testsuite in an environment simulating a stressed system in
>>>> combination with check-read1.  This exposes a few more FAILs.
>>>>
>>>> Fix some by using -lbl.
>>>>
>>>> Tested on x86_64-linux.
>>>> ---
>>>>    gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/sect-cmd.exp | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
>>>>    1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> After this commit I noticed that sect-cmd.exp would sometimes fail.  The
>>> fix seemed pretty obvious, so I went ahead and pushed it.  But if anyone
>>> feels this isn't the correct solution, let me know and I can rework
>>> things.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> sorry for the breakage, and thanks for catching and fixing it.
>>
>> I see now that I could have reproduced the failure using the readmore
>> functionality.
>>
>> I often wonder about adding both read1 and readmore to make-check-all.sh
>> (and once we go down that road, maybe clang as well), which would make
>> it easier to not forget to run those.
>>
>> The current behaviour is "Run make check with all boards from
>> gdb/testsuite/boards", and read1 and readmore are not target boards, so
>> sofar I've refrained from adding those.  Perhaps you have an opinion on
>> this?
> 
> This would certainly get a +100 from me.  The more testing that can be
> wrapped up in one place the less I forget to check with.

That's how I feel about it as well.

I've submitted a patch here ( 
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2024-October/212714.html ).

Thanks,
- Tom

> I'll be
> honest, I wasn't even aware of the 'readmore' testing until you
> mentioned it here.