From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55906) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XAaWh-0007lx-9D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 04:06:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XAaWa-0005Ad-PU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 04:06:51 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:62097) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XAaWa-00059L-Hm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 04:06:44 -0400 Message-ID: <53D20FCE.705@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 16:05:34 +0800 From: Jincheng Miao MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1406263073-635-1-git-send-email-jmiao@redhat.com> <53D20027.7090000@twiddle.net> <53D20A24.8060508@twiddle.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] cpu-exec: make TBs generated codes unlinked when -singlestep List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell , Richard Henderson Cc: Riku Voipio , QEMU Developers On 07/25/2014 03:45 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 25 July 2014 08:41, Richard Henderson wrote: >> On 07/24/2014 09:37 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> Huh? We already don't emit goto_tb if single-stepping, surely? >>> (Well, I guess some of the backends might well be broken, but >>> in that case they probably don't get the other bits of singlestep >>> support right either...) >> Indeed. I noticed this a month or so ago. >> >> Almost all backends check the gdb env->single_step to prevent goto_tb, but >> forget about the tcg debugging singlestep. > Oh, we have two flavours of singlestep? That's confusing... IMHO, CPUState->singlestep_enabled is a cpu execute mode, for emulating it, an exception should be raised. But '-singlestep' from command line rules qemu how to generate TBs and their generated codes. In this situation, a TB only contains one instruction, and should be unlinked. Am I right? > (I'm currently working on the ARMv8 architectural singlestep, > which will make 3 for target-arm.) > > thanks > -- PMM