Re: hbreak.exp: Test hardware breakpoints

["Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at mips dot com>]

On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> > 2007-09-12  Maciej W. Rozycki  <macro@mips.com>
> > 
> > 	* gdb.base/hbreak.exp: New test for "hbreak" and "thbreak".
> > 
> >  OK to apply?
> 
> No, sorry.  Compare this to the current break.exp - you'll see
> that it has some cruft that was cleaned out of that testcase, like
> gdb_suppress_entire_file.

 That's doable -- I have missed these changes were done somehow, sorry.  
I will apply them and resubmit.

> Also, when I try it using gdbserver it fails a lot of tests.  This
> is at least partially related to the previous problem (gdb_run_cmd
> was added).  I wanted to see what happened on a target that only
> failed to insert hardware breakpoints at continue.

 I do not have such a target, so I do not have means to test.  
Conservatively, I used one breakpoint only, so it should not normally 
happen as there will be at most a single such breakpoint enabled at any 
given time.  If there is a target for which it is not enough of an 
assumption indeed, I can see what can be done, though the maintainer of 
the target is welcome to provide some support with that.

 I have a MIPS target down the queue for which I have not submitted 
support yet, using EJTAG, but with that the smallest number of hardware 
breakpoints I have encountered in a given CPU was eight (and the i386 in 
its regular mode of operation has four).  It was this target I created 
this test script in the first place and, as you may expect, it passes all 
the tests included (though changes to gdb itself were required; these are 
pending too).

  Maciej