From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36651) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UwFIe-0006Ui-8W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:32:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UwFIY-0005tE-6h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:32:28 -0400 Received: from [2001:41d0:8:2b42::1] (port=53470 helo=ns232118.ovh.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UwFIY-0005sd-00 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:32:26 -0400 Message-ID: <51DAF7A5.3050904@greensocs.com> Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 19:32:21 +0200 From: Frederic Konrad MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050202090909090501030600" Subject: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Undeterministic behaviour with icount. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel Cc: Paolo Bonzini , fred.konrad@greensocs.com, Mark Burton , edgar.iglesias@gmail.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050202090909090501030600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi everybody, We get some issues with reverse execution caused by indeterminism. Something catched our attention: static void icount_warp_rt(void *opaque), cpus.c:276 We have the feeling that icount is synchronized with rt_clock, is that possible? According to this Paolo's series this must be called when the cpus are sleeping, but I saw this called frequently during the execution, is that the expected behaviour? If not what's the best way to fix that? Thanks, Fred --------------050202090909090501030600 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi everybody,

We get some issues with reverse execution caused by indeterminism.

Something catched our attention:
static void icount_warp_rt(void *opaque), cpus.c:276

We have the feeling that icount is synchronized with rt_clock, is that possible?

According to this Paolo's series this must be called when the cpus are sleeping, but
I saw this called frequently during the execution, is that the expected behaviour?
If not what's the best way to fix that?

Thanks,
Fred
--------------050202090909090501030600--