Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: teawater <teawater@gmail.com>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Submit process record and replay third time, 3/9
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 06:01:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <daef60380903082300l27f2321avb20d98f58c7dab26@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <daef60380903031941s69083858v5964a814757541c1@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Pedro,

Sorry to disturb you.
Could you please help me review it?

Thanks,
Hui

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:41, teawater <teawater@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Pedro,
>
> To get your mail is great for me.  :)
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 04:39, Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > Hi Hui,
> >
> > Sorry for the delay in getting back to this.
> >
> > On Monday 23 February 2009 09:20:13, teawater wrote:
> >
> >> ---
> >>  gdbarch.sh |    4 ++++
> >>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> --- a/gdbarch.sh
> >> +++ b/gdbarch.sh
> >> @@ -709,6 +709,10 @@ F:char *:static_transform_name:char *nam
> >>  # Set if the address in N_SO or N_FUN stabs may be zero.
> >>  v:int:sofun_address_maybe_missing:::0:0::0
> >>
> >> +# 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.
>
>
> >
> > 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?
> 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?
>
>
> >
> >> +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.
>
> By the way, process_record_dasm is so ugly name.  Do you have some idea with it?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Hui


  reply	other threads:[~2009-03-09  6:01 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 [this message]
2009-03-09 19:31                 ` Pedro Alves
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=daef60380903082300l27f2321avb20d98f58c7dab26@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=teawater@gmail.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=marc.khouzam@ericsson.com \
    --cc=pedro@codesourcery.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