gnupic: Re: Trace logging in gpsim
Subject:
Re: Trace logging in gpsim
From:
Erik Thiele ####@####.####
Date:
13 Sep 2000 08:33:48 -0000
Message-Id: <20000913082814.A507@vulcain.yyydom>
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 05:11:05PM -0500, Scott Dattalo wrote:
>
> The second experiment consisted of writing the raw trace buffer to the disk. In
> other words, the trace buffer was written using fwrite(). There was no ascii
> conversion so the result was much faster. In fact, for the first few seconds
> there was no noticable delay in the simulation. But once the internal (OS)
> memory buffers were exhausted, the simulation slowed dramatically. In fact, once
> the simulation stopped it took several seconds to write the buffered data to
> disk. I guess in about 5 seconds 72Megs worth of simulation data was
> accumulated! That's a lot of data.
>
> --------
>
> So now I have the question: is this really desirable?
>
> I'm inclined to say no. Perhaps a better approach is to significantly increase
> the internal trace buffer and provide some kind of IPC interface to gpsim to
> obtain access to this data. This sounds like something that can be done with the
> module approach.
>
> Another idea is to provide a mechanism of logging specific data. For example,
> log only register writes to a particular register. Or perhaps create triggers
> that analogous to break points but enable trace logging instead of halting
> execution.
>
> Any ideas here?
i never really looked at the gpsim source or the module interface :)
so i don't know if i correctly assume what it looks like :)
i suggest you add the possibility for a module to get the logging data.
i.e. not those integers but it must be easily possible for a module
to get all information.
then you place your new logger as a module for the persons who need it.
all the others that know some tricks to reduce output (by knowing that
logging is only needed if PORTA bit 2 = hi for example) can then write
their own logging module by adjusting your code.
writing code into gpsim is not the worst idea.
there is a philosophical question here :)
my friend and mine always tried to write computer games.
there you could move your ships and tanks around. of course
there are several kinds of ships and tanks. so we thought they had
to be configurable through config files.
what we did in the end was to create a language to describe those tanks.
instead we could have used the source code of the game and just added
the tanks in there. that would have been much easier :)
so what i want to say is perhaps it's more easy to have a good module
interface which makes me able to write my own modules, than to try
to create some logger with multi multi features which in the end
will be more complicated for the end user than the
write-your-own-module-approach :)
cu
erik
PS: just my 5 cents :)
--
Name: Erik Thiele \\\\
Email: ####@####.#### o `QQ'_
IRC: erikyyy / __8
WWW: http://www.erikyyy.de/ ' `
