Fix gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.exp race

If we make GDB report the process EXIT event for the leader thread,
instead of whatever is the last thread in the LWP list, as will be
done in a latter patch of this series, then
gdb.threads/current-lwp-dead.exp starts failing:

 (gdb) FAIL: gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.exp: catch SIGUSR1 (the program exited)

This is a testcase race -- the main thread does not wait for the
spawned clone "thread" to finish before exiting, so the main program
may exit before the second thread is scheduled and reports its
SIGUSR1.  With the change to make GDB report the EXIT for the leader,
the race is 100% reproducible by adding a sleep(), like so:

 --- c/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.c
 +++ w/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.c
 @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ local_gettid (void)
  static int
  fn (void *unused)
  {
 +  sleep (1);
    tkill (local_gettid (), SIGUSR1);
    return 0;
  }

Resulting in:

 Breakpoint 1, main (argc=1, argv=0x7fffffffd418) at gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.c:65
 65        stack = malloc (STACK_SIZE);
 (gdb) continue
 Continuing.
 [New LWP 3715562]
 [Inferior 1 (process 3715555) exited normally]
 (gdb) FAIL: gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.exp: catch SIGUSR1 (the program exited)

That inferior exit reported is actually correct.  The main thread has
indeed exited, and that's the thread that has the right exit code to
report to the user, as that's the exit code that is reported to the
program's parent.  In this case, GDB managed to collect the exit code
for the leader thread before reaping the other thread, because in
reality, the testcase isn't creating standard threads, it is using raw
clone, and the new clones are put in their own thread group.

Fix it by making the main thread wait for the child to exit.  Also,
run the program to completion for completeness.

Change-Id: I315cd3dc2b9e860395dcab9658341ea868d7a6bf

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.c b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.c
index 800514d0b6db4a24e6eed0d47033c4b0de9196e7..9e7ceb97a65ae86d319c9b021df22cd375029df3 100644 (file)
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.c
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.c
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
 #include <sys/types.h>
 #include <unistd.h>
 #include <sys/syscall.h>
+#include <sys/wait.h>
 
 #include <features.h>
 #ifdef __UCLIBC__
@@ -59,7 +60,7 @@ int
 main (int argc, char **argv)
 {
   unsigned char *stack;
-  int new_pid;
+  int new_pid, status, ret;
 
   stack = malloc (STACK_SIZE);
   assert (stack != NULL);
@@ -71,5 +72,18 @@ main (int argc, char **argv)
                   , NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
   assert (new_pid > 0);
 
+  /* Note the clone call above didn't use CLONE_THREAD, so it actually
+     put the new thread in a new thread group.  However, the new clone
+     is still reported with PTRACE_EVENT_CLONE to GDB, since we didn't
+     use CLONE_VFORK (results in PTRACE_EVENT_VFORK) nor set the
+     termination signal to SIGCHLD (results in PTRACE_EVENT_FORK), so
+     GDB thinks of it as a new thread of the same inferior.  It's a
+     bit of an odd setup, but it's not important for what we're
+     testing, and, it let's us conveniently use waitpid to wait for
+     the clone, which you can't with CLONE_THREAD.  */
+  ret = waitpid (new_pid, &status, __WALL);
+  assert (ret == new_pid);
+  assert (WIFSIGNALED (status) && WTERMSIG (status) == SIGUSR1);
+
   return 0;
 }

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.exp
index fdebd488d8adc177dabd54fe6fa71841f7522e6e..db5ae39aded2583bb2ed880a20f981dedbead6c9 100644 (file)
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/clone-new-thread-event.exp
@@ -31,3 +31,5 @@ if { ![runto_main] } {
 gdb_test "continue" \
     "Thread 2 received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.*" \
     "catch SIGUSR1"
+
+gdb_continue_to_end "" continue 1