Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: teawater <teawater@gmail.com>,  Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Submit process record and replay third time, 3/9
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:31:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200903091931.07316.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <daef60380903031941s69083858v5964a814757541c1@mail.gmail.com>

On Wednesday 04 March 2009 03:41:59, teawater wrote:

> >> +# For the process record and replay target.
> >> +M:int:process_record:CORE_ADDR addr:addr
> >
> > You'll need to extend this comment a little further.  What is this
> > callback really for?  E.g., what is it supposed to do?  These things
> > should be documented here.
> 
> What about the following:
> # Record a execution log of instruction at address addr.

How about something more descriptive like:

/* Parse the instruction at ADDR storing in the record execution log
   the registers and memory ranges that will be affected when the
   instruction executes, along with their current values.  Return -1
   if something goes wrong, 0 otherwise.  */

> > About the interface itself, would it be possible to adjust the
> > interface to make this callback's implementations not call record.c
> > functions, but instead have record.c work only with the results of
> > this callback?
> 
> Are you mean i386_process_record doesn't call the function in record.c?

Yes.

> That is so hard.  A lot of this record is same for each arch.  So I
> encapsulation them to be some function.
> For example,  record_arch_list_add_reg and record_arch_list_add_mem.
> Another arch will need it in the future.
> So, do you think it's ok?

Let's keep it as is for now.  Not much use in iterating over
this detail.

> >> +M:void:process_record_dasm:void
> >> +
> >
> > I'm puzzled by this one.  What's this for?  I can't see it being
> > used anywhere, did I miss something?  What's "dasm"?  If its not
> > used for anything yet, let's remove it for now.
> >
> In replay mode, gdb will call gdbarch_process_record_dasm to let arch
> special code analyzes the current instruction and do some replay job.
> It will make record speed up and decrease the memory use.
> 
> It just support by mips arch, but mips precord code is removed now.
> So I will removed it and add it back when some arch support it.

Thanks.

> By the way, process_record_dasm is so ugly name.  Do you have some idea with it?

No, sorry, because I don't know what "dasm" means.

-- 
Pedro Alves


  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-03-09 19:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-08  5:46 teawater
2009-01-13  3:06 ` teawater
2009-01-20 18:32   ` Marc Khouzam
2009-01-20 19:47     ` Marc Khouzam
2009-01-21  0:20       ` teawater
2009-01-21  2:53     ` teawater
2009-01-22 13:23 ` Pedro Alves
2009-01-22 15:23   ` teawater
2009-01-22 22:33     ` Pedro Alves
2009-01-22 22:36       ` Pedro Alves
2009-01-23  0:00         ` teawater
2009-01-23  6:58           ` teawater
2009-01-23 14:56   ` teawater
2009-01-23 15:34     ` Pedro Alves
2009-01-23 15:55       ` teawater
2009-02-02  9:05   ` teawater
2009-02-08 13:03     ` teawater
2009-02-17  7:12       ` teawater
2009-02-17  7:21         ` teawater
2009-02-23 16:05           ` teawater
2009-03-03 20:40             ` Pedro Alves
2009-03-04  3:42               ` teawater
2009-03-09  6:01                 ` teawater
2009-03-09 19:31                 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2009-03-10 17:03                   ` teawater
2009-03-09 20:35             ` Pedro Alves
2009-03-10 17:32               ` teawater
2009-03-10 19:35                 ` Pedro Alves
2009-03-11  1:15                   ` teawater
2009-03-13  0:27                     ` teawater
2009-03-16 11:21                     ` teawater
2009-03-18  8:50                   ` teawater
2009-03-18 13:12                   ` teawater
2009-03-18 13:05               ` teawater
2009-03-18 13:14               ` teawater
2009-03-18 13:54                 ` teawater
2009-02-23 14:08         ` teawater
2009-02-28 10:02           ` teawater

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200903091931.07316.pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=marc.khouzam@ericsson.com \
    --cc=teawater@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox