From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38353) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGSrb-000360-UM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:41:00 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGSrZ-0002R1-8Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:40:59 -0500 Received: from mail-we0-x229.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::229]:56171) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGSrZ-0002Qj-2p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:40:57 -0500 Received: by mail-we0-f169.google.com with SMTP id u56so20881441wes.0 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 05:40:56 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <54C8E6E5.6000005@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:40:53 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6AAC1A89-731A-49B8-A96A-FB1AC02D9F9B@epfl.ch> In-Reply-To: <6AAC1A89-731A-49B8-A96A-FB1AC02D9F9B@epfl.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU: DBT vs. Interpretation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Javier Picorel , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 26/01/2015 21:54, Javier Picorel wrote: > Hi, > > We are trying to make QEMU deterministic for > architectural simulation. In the absence of I/O, > let’s say only executing user code or exceptions, > is there any source of indeterminism (e.g., non > deterministic compiler optimizations, TB indeterminism) > of QEMU’s DBT versus a canonical interpreter? Thanks! No, there isn't. Paolo