From 8b272d7671fb9af34fe14bd274e97f05bb299635 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tom de Vries Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2022 10:41:13 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] [gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.guile/scm-symtab.exp for ppc64le On powerpc64le-linux, I run into: ... (gdb) PASS: gdb.guile/scm-symtab.exp: step out of func2 guile (print (> (sal-line (find-pc-line (frame-pc (selected-frame)))) line))^M = #f^M (gdb) FAIL: gdb.guile/scm-symtab.exp: test find-pc-line with resume address ... The problem is as follows: the instructions for the call to func2 are: ... 1000070c: 39 00 00 48 bl 10000744 10000710: 00 00 00 60 nop 10000714: 59 00 00 48 bl 1000076c 10000718: 00 00 00 60 nop 1000071c: 00 00 20 39 li r9,0 ... and the corresponding line number info is: ... scm-symtab.c: File name Line number Starting address View Stmt scm-symtab.c 42 0x1000070c x scm-symtab.c 43 0x10000714 x scm-symtab.c 44 0x1000071c x ... The test-case looks at the line numbers for two insns: - the insn of the call to func2 (0x10000714), and - the insn after that (0x10000718), and expects the line number of the latter to be greater than the line number of the former. However, both insns have the same line number: 43. Fix this by replacing ">" with ">=". Tested on x86_64-linux and powerpc64le-linux. --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-symtab.exp | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-symtab.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-symtab.exp index 2ea13ff0d6c..4b8b59c42de 100644 --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-symtab.exp +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-symtab.exp @@ -153,5 +153,5 @@ gdb_test "guile (print (= (sal-line (find-pc-line (frame-pc (selected-frame)))) gdb_scm_test_silent_cmd "step" "step into func2" gdb_scm_test_silent_cmd "up" "step out of func2" -gdb_test "guile (print (> (sal-line (find-pc-line (frame-pc (selected-frame)))) line))" \ +gdb_test "guile (print (>= (sal-line (find-pc-line (frame-pc (selected-frame)))) line))" \ "#t" "test find-pc-line with resume address" -- 2.30.2