Using follow-exec-mode "new" takes a different code path than "same", so
it's interesting to test this path in combination with a change in
architecture of the inferior. This test fails if you remove the
previous patch.
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gdb.multi/multi-arch-exec.exp: Test with different
"follow-exec-mode" settings.
(do_test): New procedure.
+2017-09-05 Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@ericsson.com>
+
+ * gdb.multi/multi-arch-exec.exp: Test with different
+ "follow-exec-mode" settings.
+ (do_test): New procedure.
+
2017-09-04 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/func-static.c (S::method const, S::method volatile)
return -1
}
-clean_restart ${exec1}
-if ![runto_main] then {
- fail "couldn't run to main"
- return -1
+proc do_test { mode } {
+ global exec1
+
+ clean_restart ${exec1}
+ if ![runto_main] then {
+ fail "couldn't run to main"
+ return -1
+ }
+
+ gdb_test_no_output "set follow-exec-mode $mode"
+
+ # Test that GDB updates the target description / arch successfuly
+ # after the exec.
+ gdb_test "continue" "Breakpoint 1, main.*" "continue across exec that changes architecture"
}
-# Test that GDB updates the target description / arch successfuly
-# after the exec.
-gdb_test "continue" "Breakpoint 1, main.*" "continue across exec that changes architecture"
+foreach follow_exec_mode {"same" "new"} {
+ do_test $follow_exec_mode
+}