From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5616 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2009 03:48:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 5604 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Dec 2009 03:48:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ew0-f209.google.com (HELO mail-ew0-f209.google.com) (209.85.219.209) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:48:17 +0000 Received: by ewy1 with SMTP id 1so521738ewy.8 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:48:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.2.70 with SMTP id 6mr909658ebi.30.1260503291747; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:48:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B21B85F.1030502@vmware.com> 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> Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:48:00 -0000 Message-ID: <5e81cb500912101948nb8b09e8j7d58f6332ec62a38@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: porting reversible on arm/mips From: Sean Chen To: Michael Snyder Cc: paawan oza , Hui Zhu , "gdb@sourceware.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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/msg00068.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Michael Snyder wrote: > paawan oza wrote: >> >> My target may be arm/mips. >> but some of the common hurdles are following. >> >> 1) getting virtual machine which has capability gives me arm processor >> >> 2) getting the arm linux ISO. >> Can somebody give me some pointers regarding above ? > > There's a nice separation in prec between architecture and > OS/ABI. =A0You could begin with the arm simulator that comes > built-in to gdb, and do the architecture part before > tackling the Linux ABI part. > > 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. Please correct me if I made a mistake. --=20 Best Regards, Sean Chen