This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Improve and fix catch-syscall.exp
- From: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj at redhat dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GDB Patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 15:59:02 -0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve and fix catch-syscall.exp
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <m37gb85p2o dot fsf at redhat dot com> <52AF3D59 dot 6030301 at redhat dot com>
On Monday, December 16 2013, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 12/13/2013 11:05 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-syscall.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-syscall.exp
>> index 7f1bd29..172890c 100644
>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-syscall.exp
>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/catch-syscall.exp
>> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ if { [is_remote target] || ![isnative] } then {
>> }
>>
>> # Until "catch syscall" is implemented on other targets...
>> -if {![istarget "hppa*-hp-hpux*"] && ![istarget "*-linux*"]} then {
>> +if { ![istarget "*-linux*"] } {
>> continue
>> }
>
> Why's that? AFAICS, hpux does support catching syscalls, at
> least by number I assume should work. See
> TARGET_WAITKIND_SYSCALL_ENTRY, etc. being handled in
> inf-ttrace.c. It might be better to leave the testing exposed
> there, even if it might be failing miserably.
Aha, right, I thought it was a "pasto" from somewhere else, but I see
your point. Thanks for correcting.
> Otherwise, looks like good forward progress to me,
> irrespective of where the discussion about syscall numbers
> leads (seems like even if we got the numbers from the
> program, we'd just tweak fill_all_syscalls_numbers), so
> other than the above, it looks OK to me.
Yeah. OK then, I will wait for Doug's reply and then push the patch if
he's OK with it.
Thanks,
--
Sergio