--- Begin Message ---
- From: Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:19:34 -0400
- Subject: [rfa] Gut signals.exp
- Delivery-date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:21:03 -0400
- Envelope-to: cagney@gnu.org
Hello,
The attached patch removes from signals.exp any tests covered by
sigstep.exp (I'm assuming that my sigstep.exp patch is approved).
This leaves one test (forcing a signal delivery), and for that, I merged
it with a weaker but equivalent test found at the end of the .exp file.
The only interesting bit [well I think] is that I'm also removing
several xfails. The xfailed test (it should have been a kfail) is
checking that GDB remembers that it was single-stepping, so that when a
signal handler breakpoint is hit and then continued, GDB resumes the
earlier single-step task. Making this work would involve a stack of
outstanding commands and would require a very good UI design.
Consequently, I think the feature & test can be dropped until someone is
motivated to design / implement it.
I have ensured that sigstep.exp tests a related case - step/next working
correctly when skipping a handler.
ok?
Andrew
PS: `fixed' PPC NetBSD
2004-08-24 Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
* gdb.base/signals.exp (signal_tests_1): Delete. Merge signal
delivery test with duplicate at end of file.
Index: testsuite/gdb.base/signals.exp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/signals.exp,v
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -p -u -r1.9 signals.exp
--- testsuite/gdb.base/signals.exp 9 Aug 2004 13:17:34 -0000 1.9
+++ testsuite/gdb.base/signals.exp 24 Aug 2004 14:58:11 -0000
@@ -45,116 +45,6 @@ if {$hp_cc_compiler} {
set void void
}
-proc signal_tests_1 {} {
- global gdb_prompt
- if [runto_main] then {
- gdb_test "next" "signal \\(SIGUSR1.*" \
- "next over signal call; SIGALRM handler"
- gdb_test "next" "alarm \\(.*" \
- "next over signal call; SIGUSR1 handler"
-
- # Set up an alarm, wait for it to be come pending then do a
- # next to see what happens.
-
- gdb_test "next" "\\+\\+count; /\\* first \\*/" \
- "next over 1st alarm"
- sleep 2
- gdb_test "next" "alarm .*" \
- "next over first count and SIGALRM to 2nd alarm"
-
- # Now do the same thing but with a breakpoint in the SIGALRM
- # handler so that we stop there.
-
- gdb_test "break handler" "Breakpoint \[0-9\]+ .*"
- gdb_test "next" "\\+\\+count; /\\* second \\*/" \
- "next over 2nd alarm"
- sleep 2
- gdb_test "next" "Breakpoint.*handler.*" \
- "next over second count, but jump to handler"
- gdb_test "backtrace" \
- "#0.*handler.*#1.*signal handler.*#2.* main .*" \
- "backtrace for 2nd alarm"
-
- # Let the signal handler return allowing main to advance to
- # func1.
-
- gdb_test "break func1" "Breakpoint \[0-9\]+ .*"
- gdb_test "break func2" "Breakpoint \[0-9\]+ .*"
- gdb_test "continue" "Breakpoint.*func1.*" "continue to func1"
-
- # While still in func1, force a signal, check the backtrace.
-
- gdb_test "signal SIGUSR1" "Breakpoint.*handler.*"
- gdb_test "bt" \
- "#0 handler .*#1 .signal handler called.*#2 func1 .*\#3 .*main.*" \
- "backtrace for SIGUSR1"
-
- # The problem here is that the breakpoint at func1 will be
- # inserted, and when the system finishes with the signal
- # handler it will try to execute there. For GDB to try to
- # remember that it was going to step over a breakpoint when a
- # signal happened, distinguish this case from the case where
- # func1 is called from the signal handler, etc., seems
- # exceedingly difficult. So don't expect this to get fixed
- # anytime soon.
-
- setup_xfail "*-*-*"
- set test "continue to func2"
- gdb_test_multiple "continue" "$test" {
- -re "Breakpoint.*func2.*$gdb_prompt $" {
- pass "$test"
- }
- -re "Breakpoint.*func1.*$gdb_prompt $" {
- fail "$test"
- gdb_test "continue" "Breakpoint.*func2.*" \
- "extra continue to func2"
- }
- }
-
- # In running to func2, the 2rd alarm call will have been set
- # up, let it be delivered.
-
- # This doesn't work correctly on platforms with hardware single
- # step...
-
- sleep 2
-
- setup_kfail "i*86-*-*" gdb/1738
- setup_kfail "x86_64-*-*" gdb/1738
- setup_kfail "rs6000-*-*" gdb/1738
- setup_kfail "powerpc-*-*" gdb/1738
- setup_kfail "sparc-*-*" gdb/1738
- gdb_test "continue" "Breakpoint.*handler.*" \
- "continue to handler for 3rd alarm call"
-
- setup_kfail "i*86-*-*" gdb/1738
- setup_kfail "x86_64-*-*" gdb/1738
- setup_kfail "rs6000-*-*" gdb/1738
- setup_kfail "powerpc-*-*" gdb/1738
- setup_kfail "sparc-*-*" gdb/1738
- gdb_test "backtrace" \
- "#0 handler.*#1.*signal handler called.*#2 func2.*#3.*main.*" \
- "backtrace for 3rd alarm"
-
- # If we succeeded a continue will return from the handler to
- # func2. GDB now has `forgotten' that it intended to step
- # over the breakpoint at func2 and will stop at func2.
-
- setup_xfail "*-*-*"
- set test "continue to program exit"
- gdb_test_multiple "continue" "$test" {
- -re "Program exited with code 010\\." {
- pass "$test"
- }
- -re "Breakpoint.*func2.*$gdb_prompt $" {
- fail "$test"
- gdb_test "continue" "Program exited with code 010\\." \
- "extra continue to program exit"
- }
- }
- }
-}
-
gdb_exit
gdb_start
@@ -185,7 +75,6 @@ gdb_exit
gdb_start
gdb_reinitialize_dir $srcdir/$subdir
gdb_load $binfile
-signal_tests_1
if [runto_main] then {
@@ -378,10 +267,10 @@ The program being debugged stopped while
# the inferior. (This probably causes the inferior to run away.
# Be prepared to rerun to main for further testing.)
- gdb_test "signal 5" \
- "Continuing with signal SIGTRAP.*" \
- "sent signal 5"
-
+ gdb_test "signal SIGUSR1" "Breakpoint.*handler.*"
+ gdb_test "bt" \
+ "#0 handler .*#1 .signal handler called.*\#2 .*main.*" \
+ "backtrace for SIGUSR1"
}
return 0
--- End Message ---