Julian Ganz <[email protected]> writes:

> Some analysis greatly benefits, or depends on, information about
> certain types of dicontinuities such as interrupts. For example, we may
> need to handle the execution of a new translation block differently if
> it is not the result of normal program flow but of an interrupt.
>
> Even with the existing interfaces, it is more or less possible to
> discern these situations, e.g. as done by the cflow plugin. However,
> this process poses a considerable overhead to the core analysis one may
> intend to perform.
>
> These changes introduce a generic and easy-to-use interface for plugin
> authors in the form of a callback for discontinuities. Patch 1 defines
> an enumeration of some trap-related discontinuities including somewhat
> narrow definitions of the discontinuity evetns and a callback type.
> Patch 2 defines the callback registration function. Patch 3 adds some
> hooks for triggering the callbacks. Patch 4 adds an example plugin
> showcasing the new API.
>
> Patches 5 through 22 call the hooks for all architectures but hexagon,
> mapping architecture specific events to the three categories defined in
> patch 1. We don't plan to add hooks for hexagon since despite having
> exceptions apparently doesn't have any discontinuities associated with
> them.
>
> Patch 23 supplies a test plugin asserting some behavior of the plugin
> API w.r.t. the PCs reported by the new API. Finally, patches 24 and 25
> add new tests for riscv which serve as test-cases for the test plugin.
>
> Sidenote: I'm likely doing something wrong for one architecture or
> the other. These patches are untested for most of them.
>
> Since v4:
>   - Fixed a typo in the documentation of the
>     qemu_plugin_vcpu_discon_cb_t function type (pointed out by Pierrick
>     Bouvier)
>   - Fixed a reference in the documentation of the
>     qemu_plugin_vcpu_discon_cb_t function type
>   - Added hooks for SuperH and TriCore targets
>   - Fixed typos in commit messages (pointed out by Daniel Henrique
>     Barboza)

Hi Julian,

Just checking what the status of these patches are. It looks like you
have a number of comments to address but the number of reviewed patches
is going up each revision.

Do you think you will be able to spin a new revision and look to get
this merged in the 10.2 cycle?

-- 
Alex Bennée
Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro

Reply via email to