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: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GDB Patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:50:17 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve and fix catch-syscall.exp
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <m37gb85p2o dot fsf at redhat dot com>
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.
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.
--
Pedro Alves