Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode

[Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>]

On Monday 12 December 2011 18:37:34, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:22:38 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> > I will yet update the testcase to support gdbserver.
> 
> Here you are.
> 
> I have deleted now from:
> http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/TestingGDB#Native_Board_File
> 	# Can't do hardware watchpoints, in general.
> 	set_board_info gdb,no_hardware_watchpoints 1
> 
> as all the new tests PASS for me on
> {x86_64,x86_64-m32,i686}-fedora16-linux-gnu.  

Yeah.  

Maybe we should still have something like

if { istarget [ia64*-*-*] || .... } {
  set_board_info gdb,no_hardware_watchpoints 1
}

somewhere gdbserver specific.  Some ports, like ia64 gdbserver
don't support watchpoints.  I think you can test a native
gdbserver with this board on ia64-linux, but this isn't really
native board specific --- a cross test should find watchpoints
support disabled too.  Maybe in gdbserver-support.exp?  WDYT?

> +
> +load_lib gdbserver-support.exp
> +
> +if {[skip_hw_watchpoint_access_tests]
> +    || (![istarget "i?86-*-linux*"] && ![istarget "x86_64-*-linux*"])
> +    || ([is_remote target] && [skip_gdbserver_tests])} {
> +    return 0
> +}


> +
> +if [is_remote target] {
> +    gdbserver_start_extended
> +}

Hmm, I'm not sure if this is really a good idea to spread
gdbserver_start_extended around like this.  I think it would be
better to skip the test if testing against plain "target remote".
I mean, you may be remote testing against qemu, for example.  Having
the test spawn GDBserver and actually run would be misleading.  Once
we have a board that tests the whole testsuite with extended-remote
working, then we'll clearly want the present board to skip tests
it doesn't support.  (the gdb.server/ tests being the exception.)
WDYT?

-- 
Pedro Alves