From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20072 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2009 08:16:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 20062 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Dec 2009 08:16:02 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from vtab.com (HELO oden.vtab.com) (62.20.90.195) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:15:54 +0000 Received: from oden.vtab.com (oden.vtab.com [127.0.0.1]) by oden.vtab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 362CD26EF6C; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 09:15:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from polhem (unknown [62.20.90.206]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by oden.vtab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DF7926EF80; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 09:15:49 +0100 (CET) From: "Jakob Engblom" To: "'Sean Chen'" , "'Michael Snyder'" Cc: "'paawan oza'" , "'Hui Zhu'" , References: <816087.35180.qm@web112515.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B218B30.4010501@vmware.com> <119734.20965.qm@web112506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4B21B85F.1030502@vmware.com> <5e81cb500912101948nb8b09e8j7d58f6332ec62a38@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5e81cb500912101948nb8b09e8j7d58f6332ec62a38@mail.gmail.com> Subject: RE: porting reversible on arm/mips Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <008401ca7a3a$272f65f0$758e31d0$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable x-cr-hashedpuzzle: CyvW PPK5 Sxyv a+BP e5U+ gLeU g81G iBCt sGEk siWg tE4m uj9o zS38 0O7C 0ZT1 1qN4;5;ZwBkAGIAQABzAG8AdQByAGMAZQB3AGEAcgBlAC4AbwByAGcAOwBtAHMAbgB5AGQAZQByAEAAdgBtAHcAYQByAGUALgBjAG8AbQA7AHAAYQBhAHcAYQBuADEAOQA4ADIAQAB5AGEAaABvAG8ALgBjAG8AbQA7AHMAZQBhAG4ALgBjAGgAZQBuADEAMgAzADQAQABnAG0AYQBpAGwALgBjAG8AbQA7AHQAZQBhAHcAYQB0AGUAcgBAAGcAbQBhAGkAbAAuAGMAbwBtAA==;Sosha1_v1;7;{79A94BBB-AB24-43D9-BFFD-E35884FC2858};agBhAGsAbwBiAEAAdgBpAHIAdAB1AHQAZQBjAGgALgBjAG8AbQA=;Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:15:38 GMT;UgBFADoAIABwAG8AcgB0AGkAbgBnACAAcgBlAHYAZQByAHMAaQBiAGwAZQAgAG8AbgAgAGEAcgBtAC8AbQBpAHAAcwA= x-cr-puzzleid: {79A94BBB-AB24-43D9-BFFD-E35884FC2858} X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-12/txt/msg00069.txt.bz2 > I was interested in the porting on ARM. But later I found that the > performance impact on ARM might damage the usage of process record. In > my experiment, reversible debugging is about 20000x slower, which > might be endurable on the modern computer. However, ARM target is tens > of times (or even more if we consider the memory) slower than PC. So > recording instructions will be very slow, about thousands of > instructions per second. I just must pitch in and say that it depends on the simulator. An advantage to using a full simulator is that you simplify the system and = no longer have to care about OS calls: the OS is just part of the context you = save and reverse. So the overhead actually goes down compared to native prec. I think a reversible ARM simulator can be made to run within a factor of ten = of native speed, easily.=20 Best regards, /jakob _______________________________________________________ Jakob Engblom, PhD, Technical Marketing Manager Virtutech=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Direct: +46= 8 690 07 47=A0=A0=A0 Drottningholmsv=E4gen 22=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Mobile: +46 709 242 646=A0=A0 11243 Stockholm=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Web:=A0=A0=A0 www.virtu= tech.com=A0 Sweden ________________________________________________________ =A0=20