From 240e07bd94a8da9270c57cde394f6883e43b8497 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon Marchi Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2022 09:38:12 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] gdb/testsuite: use a more unique name in gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.exp I see failures in this test, due to the function name "add" being too generic, and unexpected breakpoint locations being found in my libstdc++, such as (wrapped for readability): { number="2.4",enabled="y",addr="0x00007ffff7d67e68", func="(anonymous namespace)::fast_float::bigint::add", file="/usr/src/debug/gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/fast_float/fast_float.h", fullname="/usr/src/debug/gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/fast_float/fast_float.h", line="1815", thread-groups=["i1"] } Change the test to use a more unique name. Change-Id: I91de781be62d246eb41c73eaa410ebdd12633d1d --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.cc | 8 ++++---- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.exp | 8 ++++---- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.cc b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.cc index ab820ffdb64..969e3cbe723 100644 --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.cc +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.cc @@ -16,13 +16,13 @@ along with this program. If not, see . */ static int -add (int a, int b) +a_very_unique_name (int a, int b) { return a + b; } static double -add (double a, double b) +a_very_unique_name (double a, double b) { return a + b; } @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ add (double a, double b) int main (void) { - int i = add (3, 4); - double d = add (3.0, 4.0); + int i = a_very_unique_name (3, 4); + double d = a_very_unique_name (3.0, 4.0); return 1; } diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.exp index 8600b1bebc0..51647471f52 100644 --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.exp +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-multiple-locations.exp @@ -67,12 +67,12 @@ proc do_test { mi_version use_fix_flag expect_fixed_output } { # Check the breakpoint-created event. set pattern [make_breakpoints_pattern $expect_fixed_output 2 y y] - mi_gdb_test "break add" \ - [multi_line "&\"break add\\\\n\"" \ + mi_gdb_test "break a_very_unique_name" \ + [multi_line "&\"break a_very_unique_name\\\\n\"" \ "~\"Breakpoint ${decimal} at.*\\(2 locations\\)\\\\n\"" \ "=breakpoint-created,${pattern}" \ "\\^done" ] \ - "break add" + "break a_very_unique_name" # Check the -break-info output. mi_gdb_test "-break-info" \ @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ proc do_test { mi_version use_fix_flag expect_fixed_output } { # Check the -break-insert response. set pattern [make_breakpoints_pattern $expect_fixed_output 3 y y] - mi_gdb_test "-break-insert add" "\\^done,${pattern}" "insert breakpoint with MI command" + mi_gdb_test "-break-insert a_very_unique_name" "\\^done,${pattern}" "insert breakpoint with MI command" # Modify enableness through MI commands shouldn't trigger MI # notification. -- 2.30.2