From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GvuZi-0001H0-7B
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 17 Dec 2006 06:53:02 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GvuZg-0001GH-BG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 17 Dec 2006 06:53:01 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GvuZg-0001GD-4H
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 17 Dec 2006 06:53:00 -0500
Received: from [195.3.96.102] (helo=email.aon.at)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GvuZg-0003jT-0b
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 17 Dec 2006 06:53:00 -0500
Received: from m703p022.adsl.highway.telekom.at (HELO [192.168.1.4])
	([62.47.247.214]) (envelope-sender <maestro82@gmail.com>)
	by smarthub75.highway.telekom.at (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; 17 Dec 2006 11:52:57 -0000
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Tracing guest memory accesses
From: maestro <maestro82@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <891be9410612162319o7828c31ehc3bcf986a3ea991e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <891be9410612161942t28116f7w12123ebca0ca6278@mail.gmail.com>
	<20061217035307.GA32712@nevyn.them.org>
	<891be9410612162319o7828c31ehc3bcf986a3ea991e@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 12:52:55 +0100
Message-Id: <1166356376.4186.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Am Samstag, den 16.12.2006, 23:19 -0800 schrieb Diwaker Gupta:
> On 12/16/06, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 16, 2006 at 07:42:46PM -0800, Diwaker Gupta wrote:
> > > o do these changes seem correct? As in, do they actually track the
> > > read/write memory accesses done by the guest? I was concerned because
> > > when I start a guest, I see a whole lot of writes and not as many
> > > reads, which seems a little counter intuitive.
> >
> > No.  Those are I/O device accesses, not memory accesses.  Look at the
> > softmmu code instead.
> 
> Like I said, I did add some debugging code to softmmu_template.h. The
> read/writes I'm seeing are being generated by that softmmu debugging
> code, not the iommu code. Sorry if I wasn't clear. Is there some other
> softmmu code I should be looking at?

as far as i remember i had to put the same code into softmmu_header.h to
get "correct" results.
i found it easiest to do this in the ld/st macros in these files (~6
places in code)

hope this helps
cheers
m.