This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: gdb.cp/templates.exp, ctor/dtor breakpoints, etc....

On 16.01.2009 16:03, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:19:46AM +0100, Christophe LYON wrote:

While trying to improve my Open64/Gcc-3-3-3 based compiler results on the gdb-6.8 testsuite, I noticed on gdb.cp/templates.exp that even on x86/GCC-4.1.x there are still several KFAIL tests dating back to 2003.

In particular, there are issues when setting breakpoints on ctor/dtor.

I thought that the recent support for multiple breakpoints would fix this, so I am a bit surprised.

They've all got PRs associated with them that explain the problems. Most of them seem to deal with menus or with the names of the constructors/destructors; we've mostly fixed breakpoints by line number.

Could someone give me some updated status in this area: should the tests be revisited, or is it GDB itself that should be fixed, or GCC?

In general we use kfail only for GDB bugs, not GCC bugs.

If I take the example of PR 1112 (now bugzilla #8217), which is an issue with destructor breakpoints, the corresponding test in templates.exp used to pass with my compiler, until I stopped emitting the DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name attribute.

Doing this, I follow GCC behaviour, but I get a regression. If we don't consider this a GCC bug, it means that the way GDB recognizes ctor/dtor (any probably any overloaded function) is to be revisited? Am I right?

Note that I am not asking for someone to do the job, I may have a look at it myself; I just want to make sure it is the right approach.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]