commit 2c29df25b7c2ff006b45afd80ee6dd734ebbd47c
Author: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com>
Date:   Sun Sep 11 16:53:09 2016 -0400

    Fix false FAIL on gdb.base/stap-probe.exp, due to ICF optimization
    
    GCC 6's ICF optimization pass is making the declaration of 'm1' and
    'm2', on gdb.base/stap-probe.c, to be unified.  However, this leads to
    only one instance of the probe 'two' being created, which causes a
    failure on the testsuite (which expects a multi-location breakpoint to
    be inserted on the probe).
    
    This patch fixes this failure by declaring a dummy variable on 'm1',
    and using it as an argument to m1's version of probe 'two'.  Since we
    do not care about the contents of the functions nor about the
    arguments of each probe 'two', this is OK.
    
    gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
    2016-09-11  Sergio Durigan Junior  <sergiodj@redhat.com>
    	    Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
    
    	* gdb.base/stap-probe.c (m1): New variable 'dummy', necessary to
    	make m1's definition to be different from m2's.  Use 'dummy' as an
    	argument for probe 'two'.

### a/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
### b/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
## -1,3 +1,10 @@
+2016-09-11  Sergio Durigan Junior  <sergiodj@redhat.com>
+	    Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
+
+	* gdb.base/stap-probe.c (m1): New variable 'dummy', necessary to
+	make m1's definition to be different from m2's.  Use 'dummy' as an
+	argument for probe 'two'.
+
 2016-09-10  Jon Beniston  <jon@beniston.com>
 
 	* lib/mi-support.exp (mi_gdb_target_load): Use target_sim_options
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/stap-probe.c
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/stap-probe.c
@@ -53,8 +53,13 @@ struct funcs
 static void
 m1 (void)
 {
+  /* m1 and m2 are equivalent, but because of some compiler
+     optimizations we have to make each of them unique.  This is why
+     we have this dummy variable here.  */
+  volatile int dummy = 0;
+
   if (TEST2)
-    STAP_PROBE (test, two);
+    STAP_PROBE1 (test, two, dummy);
 }
 
 static void


commit f389f6fef76d7cf8e8beb7061edff2155c284898
Author: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed Oct 5 21:56:46 2016 +0200

    testsuite: Fix recent GCC FAIL: gdb.arch/i386-signal.exp
    
    gcc-6.2.1-2.fc24.x86_64
    
    (gdb) backtrace 10^M
    (gdb) FAIL: gdb.arch/i386-signal.exp: backtrace 10
    
    (gdb) disas/s
    Dump of assembler code for function main:
    .../gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/i386-signal.c:
    30      {
       0x000000000040057f <+0>:     push   %rbp
       0x0000000000400580 <+1>:     mov    %rsp,%rbp
    31        setup ();
       0x0000000000400583 <+4>:     callq  0x400590 <setup>
    => 0x0000000000400588 <+9>:     mov    $0x0,%eax
    32      }
       0x000000000040058d <+14>:    pop    %rbp
       0x000000000040058e <+15>:    retq
    End of assembler dump.
    
    The .exp patch is an obvious typo fix I think.  The regex was written to
    accept "ADDR in main" and I find it OK as checking .debug_line validity is not
    the purpose of this testfile.
    
    gcc-4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64 did not put the 'mov $0x0,%eax' instruction there at
    all so there was no problem with .debug_line.
    
    gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
    2016-10-05  Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
    
    	* gdb.arch/i386-signal.exp (backtrace 10): Fix #2 typo.

### a/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
### b/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog
## -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2016-10-05  Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
+
+	* gdb.arch/i386-signal.exp (backtrace 10): Fix #2 typo.
+
 2016-10-05  Yao Qi  <yao.qi@linaro.org>
 
 	* lib/gdb.exp (support_complex_tests): Return zero if
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/i386-signal.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/i386-signal.exp
@@ -35,6 +35,6 @@ gdb_load ${binfile}
 
 runto func
 gdb_test "backtrace 10" \
-    "#0  ($hex in )?func.*\r\n#1  <signal handler called>\r\n#2  ($hex in)?main.*"
+    "#0  ($hex in )?func.*\r\n#1  <signal handler called>\r\n#2  ($hex in )?main.*"
 
 gdb_test "finish" "Run till exit from \#0  func.*<signal handler called>"