Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes:
> On Fri, 30 Sept 2022 at 14:23, Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> >> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >> > This is going to break previously working setups involving >> > the "filter logging to a particular address range" and also >> > anybody post-processing logfiles and expecting to see >> > the virtual address in -d exec logging, I think. >> >> To be honest I've never found -exec logging that useful for system >> emulation (beyond check-tcg tests) because it just generates so much >> data. > > It can be very useful for "give me a list of all the > PC values where we executed an instruction", for shorter > test cases. You can then (given several of these) look at > where two runs diverge, and similar things. I use it, > so please don't break it :-) ack. FWIW you can also do that with: -plugin ./contrib/plugins/libexeclog.so,ifilter="instruction" and avoid having to reduce a bunch of massive logs. > >> > For the range-filter stuff, I'm not sure what to do. >> > Alex, any ideas? >> > >> > (I see the -dfilter option documentation doesn't say >> > whether it's intending to work on physical or virtual >> > addresses...) >> >> I have a feeling for system emulation phys-pc is the most natural but we >> could extend the filter spec to be explicit. > > ...isn't it currently based on virtual addresses, though ? Yes - or rather it only ever considered whatever was in tb->pc. > > -- PMM -- Alex Bennée
