[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC
From: |
Pavel Dovgalyuk |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC |
Date: |
Mon, 29 Oct 2018 15:24:26 +0300 |
> From: Alex Bennée [mailto:address@hidden
> Pavel Dovgalyuk <address@hidden> writes:
> > One more question about your trace points.
> > In case of using trace point on every instruction execution, we may need
> > accessing vCPU registers (including the flags). Are they valid in such
> > cases?
>
> They are probably valid but the tricky bit will be doing it in a way
> that doesn't expose the internals of the TCG. Maybe we could exploit the
> GDB interface for this or come up with a named referencex API.
>
> > I'm asking, because at least i386 translation optimizes writebacks.
>
> How so? I have to admit the i386 translation code is the most opaque to
> me but I wouldn't have thought changing the semantics of the guests
> load/store operations would be a sensible idea.
Writeback to the registers (say EFLAGS), not to the memory.
Pavel Dovgalyuk
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC, (continued)
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC, Pavel Dovgalyuk, 2018/10/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC, Alex Bennée, 2018/10/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC, Pavel Dovgalyuk, 2018/10/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC, Alex Bennée, 2018/10/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC, Pavel Dovgalyuk, 2018/10/29
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC, Alex Bennée, 2018/10/29
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC,
Pavel Dovgalyuk <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/21] Trace updates and plugin RFC, Alex Bennée, 2018/10/29