This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [testsuite patch] Fix recent GCC FAIL: gdb.arch/i386-signal.exp
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 18:39:44 +0200
- Subject: Re: [testsuite patch] Fix recent GCC FAIL: gdb.arch/i386-signal.exp
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20161003203500.GA2251@host1.jankratochvil.net> <CAH=s-POPK4vzPa9S-OMBTQ-xda6XeDrL=F1hx5FLC8=56bZ1FA@mail.gmail.com> <20161004161900.GA6231@host1.jankratochvil.net>
On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 18:19:00 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 18:07:56 +0200, Yao Qi wrote:
> > > The .c patch will properly create a new corresponding source line .debug_line
> > > entry for the 'mov $0x0,%eax' instruction and I also do not think it is
> > > relevant to the purpose of this testfile.
> >
> > Why do we need the second one?
>
> I find it more cleaner but that is up to you.
To make that my reason more explanatory - given the testcase expected output
is affected by that missing "return 0;" and its .debug_line record I find it
more clear for this testcase to put there the source line "return 0;"
explicitly than to depend on such implicit line by compiler as then the debug
info is unclear for that line - even among different compilers.
Jan