From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50226)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1ZMe26-0001o7-6g
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 11:21:39 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1ZMe22-0004PW-59
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 11:21:38 -0400
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
References: <1438593291-27109-1-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org>
	<1438593291-27109-4-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org>
	<20150804121616.GA8192@aurel32.net> <87h9ofks0j.fsf@linaro.org>
	<CAFEAcA9o7TOHEr_Uojan-uYWhvBpniYzG9hxG6102CAg+uWiwg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Message-ID: <55C0D879.90404@twiddle.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 08:21:29 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA9o7TOHEr_Uojan-uYWhvBpniYzG9hxG6102CAg+uWiwg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 03/11] qemu-log: correct help text for
 -d cpu
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Cc: QEMU Trivial <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaitepeter@gmail.com>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>

On 08/04/2015 08:15 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 4 August 2015 at 16:11, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> writes:
>>> On 2015-08-03 10:14, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>> In practice this is not true for linked TB. Should we also disable TB
>>> linking when this option is enabled?
>>
>> Good question. I suspect yes because if you've gone to level of wanting
>> exec tracing you'll probably get confused by the chaining. Of course it
>> will run a lot slower then.
> 
> Unless the bug you were trying to track down is caused by the exec
> chaining, of course... But yes, I think we get more people wanting
> chaining to be disableable.
> 
> Not sure we want to tie it to the 'cpu' debug option, though -- it
> applies just as much to 'exec'.

Does it make more sense to have a 'nochain' debug option, and not tie it to
either 'cpu' or 'exec'?  It might be occasionally useful on its own, simply to
determine if a bug does exist in the exec chaining.


r~