| Message ID | 20240422230700.1173173-2-thiago.bauermann@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add testcase for libc memory operations | expand |
On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 20:06:59 -0300 Thiago Jung Bauermann <thiago.bauermann@linaro.org> wrote: > Factor the test for libc debug info out of gdb.base/relativedebug.exp to > a new procedure. > > Also, change the "info sharedlibrary" test to explicitly detect when > libc has debug info. > --- > > As mentioned in the cover letter, the new testcase doesn't use this helper > procedure anymore so this is an optional patch. I think it's a nice > cleanup, though I didn't find any other testcase that need it so perhaps > the new helper is not as useful as I imagine it to be. I'm fine with not > committing this patch. > > Changes in v3: > - Include <stdio.h> in test program to avoid error when using clang > (suggested by Kevin). I agree that it's a nice cleanup and I think that it should go in. I've retested with CC_FOR_TARGET set to clang and also gcc. It works for both. Approved-by: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Hello Kevin, Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com> writes: > On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 20:06:59 -0300 > Thiago Jung Bauermann <thiago.bauermann@linaro.org> wrote: > >> Factor the test for libc debug info out of gdb.base/relativedebug.exp to >> a new procedure. >> >> Also, change the "info sharedlibrary" test to explicitly detect when >> libc has debug info. >> --- >> >> As mentioned in the cover letter, the new testcase doesn't use this helper >> procedure anymore so this is an optional patch. I think it's a nice >> cleanup, though I didn't find any other testcase that need it so perhaps >> the new helper is not as useful as I imagine it to be. I'm fine with not >> committing this patch. >> >> Changes in v3: >> - Include <stdio.h> in test program to avoid error when using clang >> (suggested by Kevin). > > I agree that it's a nice cleanup and I think that it should go in. > > I've retested with CC_FOR_TARGET set to clang and also gcc. It works > for both. > > Approved-by: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com> Thank you! Pushed as commit f5ef12c3f1af.
Hi Thiago, On 4/24/24 18:25, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Hello Kevin, > > Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com> writes: > >> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 20:06:59 -0300 >> Thiago Jung Bauermann <thiago.bauermann@linaro.org> wrote: >> >>> Factor the test for libc debug info out of gdb.base/relativedebug.exp to >>> a new procedure. >>> >>> Also, change the "info sharedlibrary" test to explicitly detect when >>> libc has debug info. >>> --- >>> >>> As mentioned in the cover letter, the new testcase doesn't use this helper >>> procedure anymore so this is an optional patch. I think it's a nice >>> cleanup, though I didn't find any other testcase that need it so perhaps >>> the new helper is not as useful as I imagine it to be. I'm fine with not >>> committing this patch. >>> >>> Changes in v3: >>> - Include <stdio.h> in test program to avoid error when using clang >>> (suggested by Kevin). >> >> I agree that it's a nice cleanup and I think that it should go in. >> >> I've retested with CC_FOR_TARGET set to clang and also gcc. It works >> for both. >> >> Approved-by: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com> > > Thank you! Pushed as commit f5ef12c3f1af. > I think I have an issue with this commmit. I use a self-built riscv-unknown-elf toolchain with newlib, so there is no libc at all, regardless of debug info. since today, I see messages like: Running /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp ... FAIL: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: info sharedlibrary libc.so ERROR: tcl error sourcing /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp. ERROR: tcl error code TCL READ VARNAME ERROR: can't read "libc_has_debug_info": no such variable while executing "verbose "$me: returning $libc_has_debug_info" 2" (procedure "gdb_real__libc_has_debug_info" line 47) invoked from within "gdb_real__libc_has_debug_info" ("uplevel" body line 1) invoked from within "uplevel 2 [list $real_name {*}$args]" invoked from within "gdb_do_cache_wrap $real_name {*}$args" (procedure "gdb_do_cache" line 48) invoked from within "gdb_do_cache libc_has_debug_info" (procedure "libc_has_debug_info" line 1) invoked from within "libc_has_debug_info" ("uplevel" body line 1) invoked from within "uplevel 1 $fn" (procedure "require" line 11) invoked from within "require {!target_info exists gdb,nosignals} libc_has_debug_info" (file "/home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp" line 16) invoked from within "source /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp" ("uplevel" body line 1) invoked from within "uplevel #0 source /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp" invoked from within "catch "uplevel #0 source $test_file_name" msg" UNRESOLVED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: testcase '/home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp' aborted due to Tcl error PATH: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: testcase '/home/ed/gnu/ while previously that looked like: gdb compile failed, /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: /tmp/ccjr19GC.o: in function `main': /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:30:(.text+0x28): undefined reference to `alarm' /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x30): undefined reference to `pause' /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x38): undefined reference to `pause' collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status UNTESTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: failed to compile so not very noisy, newlib does apparently not have alarm, pause, sleep, and similar, but much easier to understand the output... Regards, Bernd.
Hello Bernd, Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de> writes: > Hi Thiago, > > On 4/24/24 18:25, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >>> >> Thank you! Pushed as commit f5ef12c3f1af. > > I think I have an issue with this commmit. > I use a self-built riscv-unknown-elf toolchain with newlib, > so there is no libc at all, regardless of debug info. > since today, I see messages like: > Running /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp ... > FAIL: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: info sharedlibrary libc.so > ERROR: tcl error sourcing /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp. > ERROR: tcl error code TCL READ VARNAME > ERROR: can't read "libc_has_debug_info": no such variable > while executing > "verbose "$me: returning $libc_has_debug_info" 2" > (procedure "gdb_real__libc_has_debug_info" line 47) > invoked from within > "gdb_real__libc_has_debug_info" <snip> Sorry for the trouble. I should have simulated a situation where GDB can't find libc.so in the inferior. I was able to reproduce the error above when I did. Could you please test the patch that I just sent? > while previously that looked like: > > gdb compile failed, /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: /tmp/ccjr19GC.o: in function `main': > /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:30:(.text+0x28): undefined reference to `alarm' > /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: > /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x30): > undefined reference to `pause' > /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: > /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x38): > undefined reference to `pause' > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > UNTESTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: failed to compile > > so not very noisy, newlib does apparently not have alarm, pause, sleep, and similar, > but much easier to understand the output... On the plus side, with this problem fixed gdb.base/relativedebug.exp should exit early with: (gdb) info sharedlibrary libc.so No shared libraries matched. (gdb) UNSUPPORTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: require failed: libc_has_debug_info (libc not found in the inferior) Which will be even easier to understand the output. :-)
Hello Thiago, On 4/26/24 05:00, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > Sorry for the trouble. I should have simulated a situation where GDB > can't find libc.so in the inferior. I was able to reproduce the error > above when I did. > > Could you please test the patch that I just sent? > Yeah it works. Thanks a lot for the quick response. >> while previously that looked like: >> >> gdb compile failed, /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: /tmp/ccjr19GC.o: in function `main': >> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:30:(.text+0x28): undefined reference to `alarm' >> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x30): >> undefined reference to `pause' >> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x38): >> undefined reference to `pause' >> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status >> UNTESTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: failed to compile >> >> so not very noisy, newlib does apparently not have alarm, pause, sleep, and similar, >> but much easier to understand the output... > > On the plus side, with this problem fixed gdb.base/relativedebug.exp > should exit early with: > > (gdb) info sharedlibrary libc.so > No shared libraries matched. > (gdb) UNSUPPORTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: require failed: libc_has_debug_info (libc not found in the inferior) > > Which will be even easier to understand the output. :-) > Yes, indeed. If I had one wish free, I would like to have these lines not mention the random /tmp/*.o file name: gdb compile failed, /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: /tmp/ccjr19GC.o: in function `main': ... at least in the gdb.sum file. Thanks Bernd.
On 2024-04-26 04:00, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Hello Bernd, > > Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de> writes: > >> Hi Thiago, >> >> On 4/24/24 18:25, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >>>> >>> Thank you! Pushed as commit f5ef12c3f1af. >> >> I think I have an issue with this commmit. >> I use a self-built riscv-unknown-elf toolchain with newlib, >> so there is no libc at all, regardless of debug info. >> since today, I see messages like: >> Running /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp ... >> FAIL: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: info sharedlibrary libc.so >> ERROR: tcl error sourcing /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp. >> ERROR: tcl error code TCL READ VARNAME >> ERROR: can't read "libc_has_debug_info": no such variable >> while executing >> "verbose "$me: returning $libc_has_debug_info" 2" >> (procedure "gdb_real__libc_has_debug_info" line 47) >> invoked from within >> "gdb_real__libc_has_debug_info" > > <snip> > > Sorry for the trouble. I should have simulated a situation where GDB > can't find libc.so in the inferior. I was able to reproduce the error > above when I did. > > Could you please test the patch that I just sent? > >> while previously that looked like: >> >> gdb compile failed, /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: /tmp/ccjr19GC.o: in function `main': >> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:30:(.text+0x28): undefined reference to `alarm' >> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x30): >> undefined reference to `pause' >> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x38): >> undefined reference to `pause' >> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status >> UNTESTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: failed to compile >> >> so not very noisy, newlib does apparently not have alarm, pause, sleep, and similar, >> but much easier to understand the output... > > On the plus side, with this problem fixed gdb.base/relativedebug.exp > should exit early with: > > (gdb) info sharedlibrary libc.so > No shared libraries matched. > (gdb) UNSUPPORTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: require failed: libc_has_debug_info (libc not found in the inferior) > > Which will be even easier to understand the output. :-) > I don't think that's a good outcome, actually. It'll disable the testcase on systems that link with their libc statically (even if has debug info), or systems that name their libc something else. And I worry that the require predicate will start being used more with that particularity. The original check only returned early if a library called "*libc*" was found, and, it didn't have debug info. If those conditions didn't match, the testcase proceeded. That seems a lot safer. As in, only if we know for sure we have a libc without debug info, do we return early.
Hello Pedro, Pedro Alves <pedro@palves.net> writes: > On 2024-04-26 04:00, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> >> Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de> writes: >> >>> while previously that looked like: >>> >>> gdb compile failed, >>> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >>> /tmp/ccjr19GC.o: in function `main': >>> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:30:(.text+0x28): >>> undefined reference to `alarm' >>> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >>> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x30): >>> undefined reference to `pause' >>> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >>> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x38): >>> undefined reference to `pause' >>> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status >>> UNTESTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: failed to compile >>> >>> so not very noisy, newlib does apparently not have alarm, pause, sleep, and similar, >>> but much easier to understand the output... >> >> On the plus side, with this problem fixed gdb.base/relativedebug.exp >> should exit early with: >> >> (gdb) info sharedlibrary libc.so >> No shared libraries matched. >> (gdb) UNSUPPORTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: require failed: libc_has_debug_info (libc >> not found in the inferior) >> >> Which will be even easier to understand the output. :-) >> > > I don't think that's a good outcome, actually. It'll disable the testcase on systems that > link > with their libc statically (even if has debug info), or systems that name their libc > something else. > And I worry that the require predicate will start being used more with that particularity. > > The original check only returned early if a library called "*libc*" was found, and, it > didn't > have debug info. If those conditions didn't match, the testcase proceeded. That seems a > lot safer. As in, only if we know for sure we have a libc without debug info, do we > return early. Ok, makes sense. I'll submit a patch for the libc_has_debug_info that makes it behave like the original check in gdb.base/relativedebug.exp did.
Hello Pedro, Thiago Jung Bauermann <thiago.bauermann@linaro.org> writes: > Pedro Alves <pedro@palves.net> writes: > >> On 2024-04-26 04:00, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >>> >>> Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de> writes: >>> >>>> while previously that looked like: >>>> >>>> gdb compile failed, >>>> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >>>> /tmp/ccjr19GC.o: in function `main': >>>> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:30:(.text+0x28): >>>> undefined reference to `alarm' >>>> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >>>> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x30): >>>> undefined reference to `pause' >>>> /home/ed/gnu/riscv64-unknown-elf/lib/gcc/riscv64-unknown-elf/14.0.1/../../../../riscv64-unknown-elf/bin/ld: >>>> /home/ed/gnu/binutils-build-riscv64/gdb/testsuite/../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.c:31:(.text+0x38): >>>> undefined reference to `pause' >>>> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status >>>> UNTESTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: failed to compile >>>> >>>> so not very noisy, newlib does apparently not have alarm, pause, sleep, and similar, >>>> but much easier to understand the output... >>> >>> On the plus side, with this problem fixed gdb.base/relativedebug.exp >>> should exit early with: >>> >>> (gdb) info sharedlibrary libc.so >>> No shared libraries matched. >>> (gdb) UNSUPPORTED: gdb.base/relativedebug.exp: require failed: libc_has_debug_info (libc >>> not found in the inferior) >>> >>> Which will be even easier to understand the output. :-) >>> >> >> I don't think that's a good outcome, actually. It'll disable the testcase on systems that >> link >> with their libc statically (even if has debug info), or systems that name their libc >> something else. >> And I worry that the require predicate will start being used more with that particularity. >> >> The original check only returned early if a library called "*libc*" was found, and, it >> didn't >> have debug info. If those conditions didn't match, the testcase proceeded. That seems a >> lot safer. As in, only if we know for sure we have a libc without debug info, do we >> return early. > > Ok, makes sense. I'll submit a patch for the libc_has_debug_info that > makes it behave like the original check in gdb.base/relativedebug.exp > did. Here it is: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gdb-patches/20240430015325.89780-1-thiago.bauermann@linaro.org/
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp index bf8d76887122..f882a5cf1676 100644 --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/relativedebug.exp @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License # along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. -require {!target_info exists gdb,nosignals} +require {!target_info exists gdb,nosignals} libc_has_debug_info standard_testfile .c @@ -28,17 +28,6 @@ clean_restart ${binfile} runto_main -set test "info sharedlibrary" -gdb_test_multiple $test $test { - -re ".*\(\\*\)\[^\r\n\]*/libc\.so.*$gdb_prompt $" { - # Skip the test below if libc doesn't have debug info. - unsupported "libc doesn't have debug info" - return -1 - } - -re ".*$gdb_prompt $" { - } -} - # pause () -> SIGALRM -> handler () -> abort () gdb_test "continue" "Program received signal SIGABRT.*" diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp index cbd37fd30947..1e26937c0dcf 100644 --- a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp +++ b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp @@ -3699,6 +3699,62 @@ proc support_displaced_stepping {} { return 0 } +# Return 1 if GDB can find the libc debug info, or 0 and a reason string if it +# can't. This procedure is meant to be called by the require procedure. +gdb_caching_proc libc_has_debug_info {} { + global srcdir subdir gdb_prompt inferior_exited_re + + set me "libc_has_debug_info" + + # Compile a test program. + set src { + #include <stdio.h> + + int main (void) { + printf ("Hello, world!\n"); + return 0; + } + } + if {![gdb_simple_compile $me $src executable {debug}]} { + return [list 0 "failed to compile test program"] + } + + # No error message, compilation succeeded so now run it via gdb. + + gdb_exit + gdb_start + gdb_reinitialize_dir $srcdir/$subdir + gdb_load "$obj" + runto_main + set test "info sharedlibrary libc.so" + gdb_test_multiple $test $test { + -re ".*\(\\*\)\[^\r\n\]*/libc\.so.*$gdb_prompt $" { + # Matched the "(*)" in the "Syms Read" columns which means: + # "(*): Shared library is missing debugging information." + verbose -log "$me: libc doesn't have debug info" + set libc_has_debug_info 0 + set message "libc doesn't have debug info" + } + -re ".*Yes\[ \t\]+\[^\r\n\]*/libc\.so.*$gdb_prompt $" { + verbose -log "$me: libc has debug info" + set libc_has_debug_info 1 + } + default { + set libc_has_debug_info 0 + set message "libc not found in the inferior" + } + } + gdb_exit + remote_file build delete $obj + + verbose "$me: returning $libc_has_debug_info" 2 + if { $libc_has_debug_info } { + return $libc_has_debug_info + } else { + return [list $libc_has_debug_info $message] + } +} + # Run a test on the target to see if it supports vmx hardware. Return 1 if so, # 0 if it does not. Based on 'check_vmx_hw_available' from the GCC testsuite.