Jun Koi a écrit : > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:28 AM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote: >> Alexander Graf wrote: >>> On 13.04.2010, at 15:36, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> >>>> Jun Koi wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I am looking into the singlestep command in monitor interface, and it >>>>> seems that we only take into account the singlestep flag when we are >>>>> translating code. >>>>> So for the already-translated code, we will miss singlestep? >>>> This feature is broken. For TCG, it should at least flush the >>>> translation buffer, and for KVM it has to enable single-stepping in the >>>> kernel. That's what happens automatically when you call cpu_single_step. >>>> I guess 'singlestep' wants to be somehow orthogonal to this. But this is >>>> the wrong approach. >>>> >>>> Does anyone actually used this feature or still does so? It looks fairly >>>> redundant to me, kind of a poor-man's gdb front-end as part of the >>>> monitor console. >>> Not sure what it does, but I use -singlestep quite a lot to get register >>> dumps for instructions when using -d cpu. >> Ah, "singlestep" is not about stopping the VM after each instruction but >> about limiting the TB length to a single instruction. Badly named and >> poorly documented. >> >> In that case, the dynamic switch should already be fine by adding a >> tb_flush() on enable. Still, someone should also patch at least the docs. >>
What's the real point of flushing the tb to get it retranslated again? It will be retranslated in the exact same way. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
