On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Fabien Chouteau <chout...@adacore.com> wrote: > On 04/25/2011 08:10 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 04/25/2011 12:27 PM, Lluís wrote: >>> But in any case, I'm still not sure if stderr should have programatic >>> tracing state controls. >> >> Yes, please, stderr is even more useful than simple when you're using it >> under gdb. > > Agreed, trace control seems really useful with stderr, and we should be able > to > do this in a generic way (shared by simple and stderr backends).
The commonality between stderr and simple is having a set of trace events with on/off states. Generating trace.h/trace.c is mostly common. Toggling trace event states from the monitor as well as -trace events=<file> are common. The simple backend additionally allows setting and flushing the output file. It also supports dumping the trace buffer. Stefan
