diff mbox

[v4,03/11] qemu-log: correct help text for -d cpu

Message ID 1438593291-27109-4-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org
State Superseded
Headers show

Commit Message

Alex Bennée Aug. 3, 2015, 9:14 a.m. UTC
This doesn't just dump CPU state on translation but on every block
entrance.

Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>

---
v4
  - add r-b tag
---
 qemu-log.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Alex Bennée Aug. 4, 2015, 3:11 p.m. UTC | #1
Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> writes:

> On 2015-08-03 10:14, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> This doesn't just dump CPU state on translation but on every block
>> entrance.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>
>> 
>> ---
>> v4
>>   - add r-b tag
>> ---
>>  qemu-log.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/qemu-log.c b/qemu-log.c
>> index 13f3813..be8405e 100644
>> --- a/qemu-log.c
>> +++ b/qemu-log.c
>> @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ const QEMULogItem qemu_log_items[] = {
>>      { CPU_LOG_EXEC, "exec",
>>        "show trace before each executed TB (lots of logs)" },
>>      { CPU_LOG_TB_CPU, "cpu",
>> -      "show CPU state before block translation" },
>> +      "show CPU registers before each executed TB (lots of logs)" },
>>      { CPU_LOG_MMU, "mmu",
>>        "log MMU-related activities" },
>>      { CPU_LOG_PCALL, "pcall",
>
> In practice this is not true for linked TB. Should we also disable TB
> linking when this option is enabled?

Good question. I suspect yes because if you've gone to level of wanting
exec tracing you'll probably get confused by the chaining. Of course it
will run a lot slower then.
Peter Maydell Aug. 4, 2015, 3:15 p.m. UTC | #2
On 4 August 2015 at 16:11, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> writes:
>> On 2015-08-03 10:14, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> In practice this is not true for linked TB. Should we also disable TB
>> linking when this option is enabled?
>
> Good question. I suspect yes because if you've gone to level of wanting
> exec tracing you'll probably get confused by the chaining. Of course it
> will run a lot slower then.

Unless the bug you were trying to track down is caused by the exec
chaining, of course... But yes, I think we get more people wanting
chaining to be disableable.

Not sure we want to tie it to the 'cpu' debug option, though -- it
applies just as much to 'exec'.

-- PMM
Alex Bennée Aug. 4, 2015, 5:22 p.m. UTC | #3
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> writes:

> On 08/04/2015 08:15 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 4 August 2015 at 16:11, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> writes:
>>>> On 2015-08-03 10:14, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>>> In practice this is not true for linked TB. Should we also disable TB
>>>> linking when this option is enabled?
>>>
>>> Good question. I suspect yes because if you've gone to level of wanting
>>> exec tracing you'll probably get confused by the chaining. Of course it
>>> will run a lot slower then.
>> 
>> Unless the bug you were trying to track down is caused by the exec
>> chaining, of course... But yes, I think we get more people wanting
>> chaining to be disableable.
>> 
>> Not sure we want to tie it to the 'cpu' debug option, though -- it
>> applies just as much to 'exec'.
>
> Does it make more sense to have a 'nochain' debug option, and not tie it to
> either 'cpu' or 'exec'?  It might be occasionally useful on its own, simply to
> determine if a bug does exist in the exec chaining.

Would that make sense as a debug option or should we have a specific set
of TCG options to alter its behaviour?

>
>
> r~
Alex Bennée Aug. 4, 2015, 7:08 p.m. UTC | #4
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> writes:

> On 08/04/2015 10:22 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> 
>> Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> writes:
>> 
>>> On 08/04/2015 08:15 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>>> On 4 August 2015 at 16:11, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>> Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> writes:
>>>>>> On 2015-08-03 10:14, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>>>>> In practice this is not true for linked TB. Should we also disable TB
>>>>>> linking when this option is enabled?
>>>>>
>>>>> Good question. I suspect yes because if you've gone to level of wanting
>>>>> exec tracing you'll probably get confused by the chaining. Of course it
>>>>> will run a lot slower then.
>>>>
>>>> Unless the bug you were trying to track down is caused by the exec
>>>> chaining, of course... But yes, I think we get more people wanting
>>>> chaining to be disableable.
>>>>
>>>> Not sure we want to tie it to the 'cpu' debug option, though -- it
>>>> applies just as much to 'exec'.
>>>
>>> Does it make more sense to have a 'nochain' debug option, and not tie it to
>>> either 'cpu' or 'exec'?  It might be occasionally useful on its own, simply to
>>> determine if a bug does exist in the exec chaining.
>> 
>> Would that make sense as a debug option or should we have a specific set
>> of TCG options to alter its behaviour?
>
>
> That's what I'm saying -- probably a separate debug option is better.

Sorry I meant should we add it to -d (as in -d nochain) or have some tcg
opts (--tcg nochain,blah)

>
>
> r~
Peter Maydell Sept. 15, 2015, 7:28 p.m. UTC | #5
On 4 August 2015 at 20:16, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> wrote:
> On 08/04/2015 12:08 PM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>>> Would that make sense as a debug option or should we have a specific set
>>>> of TCG options to alter its behaviour?
>>>
>>>
>>> That's what I'm saying -- probably a separate debug option is better.
>>
>> Sorry I meant should we add it to -d (as in -d nochain) or have some tcg
>> opts (--tcg nochain,blah)
>
> I was suggesting the former: -d nochain.

Did anybody ever write the patch to add 'nochain' support?

thanks
-- PMM
Richard Henderson Sept. 15, 2015, 7:41 p.m. UTC | #6
On 09/15/2015 12:28 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 4 August 2015 at 20:16, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> wrote:
>> On 08/04/2015 12:08 PM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>>>> Would that make sense as a debug option or should we have a specific set
>>>>> of TCG options to alter its behaviour?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's what I'm saying -- probably a separate debug option is better.
>>>
>>> Sorry I meant should we add it to -d (as in -d nochain) or have some tcg
>>> opts (--tcg nochain,blah)
>>
>> I was suggesting the former: -d nochain.
> 
> Did anybody ever write the patch to add 'nochain' support?

Nope.  ;-)


r~
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/qemu-log.c b/qemu-log.c
index 13f3813..be8405e 100644
--- a/qemu-log.c
+++ b/qemu-log.c
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@  const QEMULogItem qemu_log_items[] = {
     { CPU_LOG_EXEC, "exec",
       "show trace before each executed TB (lots of logs)" },
     { CPU_LOG_TB_CPU, "cpu",
-      "show CPU state before block translation" },
+      "show CPU registers before each executed TB (lots of logs)" },
     { CPU_LOG_MMU, "mmu",
       "log MMU-related activities" },
     { CPU_LOG_PCALL, "pcall",