This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Adjust `pc-fp.exp' for ppc64/s390x (PR 12659)
- From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- To: palves at redhat dot com
- Cc: sergiodj at redhat dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, tromey at redhat dot com, jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:57:16 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Adjust `pc-fp.exp' for ppc64/s390x (PR 12659)
- References: <m3mx2fmxmb.fsf@redhat.com> <5018ECBE.4020007@redhat.com>
> Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:45:50 +0100
> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
>
> On 07/31/2012 10:25 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
> > While regtesting 7.4 against 7.5 branch on ppc64/s390x RHEL 6.3, I
> > noticed this failure. The patch which introduced this failure was
> > committed because of:
> >
> > http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12659
> >
> > On x86*, the output of `info register pc fp' is:
> >
> > info register pc fp
> > pc: 0x400520
> > fp: 0x7fffffffc490
> > (gdb) PASS: gdb.base/pc-fp.exp: info register pc fp
> >
> > On ppc64/s390x, it is:
> >
> > info register pc fp
> > pc 0x10000658 0x10000658 <main+20>
> > fp: 0xfffffffd120
> > (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/pc-fp.exp: info register pc fp
> >
> > Since this difference in the output does not seem to be an error itself,
> > the patch below just adjusts the testcase to match this kind of output
> > as well. It does not fail on x86*.
>
> Why is the output format different? It looks like consistency here
> would be good.
Indeed. So I'd say patching up the testsuite for this difference
would be the wrong way to go.